Directory of Commonwealth Government evaluations, audits and ...

Directory of Commonwealth
Government evaluations, audits and
reviews of Indigenous-specific and
relevant mainstream programs
2002- 2014
Compiled by the Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination (OIPC)
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
30 June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
INDEX
Introduction 1
Australian National Audit Office 2
Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) 2
Attorney-General’s Department (AGD) 5
Indigenous Law and Justice Program Evaluations 5
Prisoner Through-care Reviews 5
Performance Audit of the Northern Territory Night Patrols Program 6
Law and Justice Advocacy Development (LJAD) Program 6
Legal Aid for Indigenous Australians (LEGA) Program 6
Prevention, Diversion, Rehabilitation and Restorative Justice (PDRR) Program 6
Audit Report No. 1 2006-07: Administration of the Native Title Respondents Funding Scheme 7
Family Violence Prevention Legal Services Programme 8
Native Title Claims Resolution Review 8
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Agreement 10
Evaluation of the Legal and Preventative Services Program 11
Review of the Northern Territory Agreement 12
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government 14
East Kimberley Development Package 14
Remote Air Services Subsidy (RASS) Scheme 14
Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy 15
Community Phones Program – Telecommunications Action Plan for Remote Aboriginal
Communities 15
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations 16
Two year review of remote employment servicing arrangements under CDEP, IEP and JSA 16
Smarter Schools National Partnerships (SSNPSs)- national evaluation 16
Evaluation of the reformed Indigenous Employment Program 16
Evaluation of Indigenous servicing under Job Services Australia 17
National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions 17
Evaluation of the reforms to the Job Capacity Assessment 17
Trade Training Centres (TTCs) in schools Program 17
Evaluation of Disability Employment Services 18
Multifunctional Aboriginal Children’s Services (MACS) and Crèches 18
Indigenous Boarding Facilities and Indigenous Boarding Hostels Partnership Program 19
Review of higher education access and outcomes for Indigenous people 19
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
June 2010
i

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Parental and Community Engagement (PaCE) Program 19
Evaluation of the Jobs and Training Compact 19
Evaluation of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 16
STEP and Wage Assistance: A net impact study: Off benefit outcomes measured to August 2007
20
Audit of the Expansion of the Intensive Literacy and Numeracy Programs and Individual Learning
20
Early Childhood Education National Partnership 20
Evaluation of the Community Festivals for Education Engagement Program 20
Indigenous Languages Programmes in Australian Schools – A Way Forward 21
Parent School Partnership Initiative Audit 22
Performance Audit of the Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF) and the Indigenous Capital
Assistance Scheme (ICAS) 23
Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF) 23
CDEP Program 23
Evaluation of the Indigenous Youth Employment Consultant Programme 24
Study of Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme and Whole of School Intervention Strategy 24
Evaluation of the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme – Away-from-base for
Mixed Mode delivery (IESIP-AFB) programme 25
Review into the impact of the ABSTUDY policy changes that came into effect in 2000 26
Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Program – Away-from-Base for ‘Mixed-mode’ Delivery
[IESIP-AFB]
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Review of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) Program 27
CDEP Program Evaluations 27
Post-Implementation Review - Removal of Phase 1 Remote Area Exemptions 28
Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA) audits of Community Development Employment Projects
(CDEP) 29
Evaluation of Australians Working Together 29
Review of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) Program 30
Review of the Indigenous Education Direct Assistance Program – Final Report 30
The Role of Community Development Employment Projects in Rural and Remote Communities 31
Indigenous Employment Policy Evaluation (Stage 2) 32
Indigenous Employment Program Evaluations 33
Evaluation of the National Indigenous English Literacy and Numeracy Strategy 33
Breaks in the Road – Evaluation of the Indigenous Youth Partnership Initiative 34
Review of ATAS Bulk Funding Arrangements to Higher Education and Boarding Schools 34
Review of the Independent Indigenous Vocational Education and Training Providers 35
Review of Indigenous Education Consultative Bodies and Indigenous Support Units 36
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
ii
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Indigenous Employment Policy Evaluation (Stage 1) 36
Implementation and Management of the Indigenous Employment Policy 37
Audit Report No. 43 2001-02: Indigenous Education Strategies 37
Evaluation of the Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF) 38
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities 39
Caring for Our Country Program 39
Working on Country 39
Indigenous Heritage Program 40
Indigenous Protected Areas Program 40
Bushlight Program 42
Indigenous Engagement in Natural Resource Management 42
Bushlight Evaluation 43
Office for the Arts (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet) 45
National Arts and Crafts Industry Support 46
Maintenance of Indigenous Language and Records Program 46
Indigenous Culture Support Program (previously known as the Regional Arts and Culture Support
Program) 47
Office for Sport (Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet) 48
Indigenous Sport and Recreation Program (ISRP) 48
Indigenous Sport and Recreation Program (ISRP) 48
Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) 49
Evaluation of the 2010 Budget measure – Expanding the supply of Opal fuel 49
Indigenous Mobile Dental Program [Mobile Dental Services Pilot for Rural and Regional Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Communities] 49
Evaluation of the Indigenous Chronic Disease Package 50
National Indigenous Health Workforce Training Package 50
Indigenous Early Childhood Development (IECD) National Partnership (NP) Agreement 51
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Mobile Outreach Service (MOS) and the Northern Territory
Mobile Outreach Service Plus (MOS Plus) 52
Performance Audit of Residential Aged Care for Indigenous Australians 52
The Evaluation of the Northern Territory (NT) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community
Aged Care Workforce Development Initiatives 53
Healthy for Life Program Evaluation 54
Evaluation of Primary Health Care Funding 56
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Emergency Response Child Health Check Initiative (CHCI) and
the Expanding Health Services Delivery Initiative (EHSDI) 57
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
iii
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Impact of Opal fuel 58
Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Service Components of the Northern Territory Emergency
Response 59
Mid-Term Evaluation of the Quality Assurance for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Medical
Services (QAAMS) Program 60
Quality Use of Medicines Maximised for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People (QUMAX)
Program 61
Audit of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services 61
Evaluation of the Continuous Improvement Projects (CIP) for the Early Detection and
Management of Chronic Disease for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People 62
Croc Festivals 63
Evaluation of the Bringing Them Home and Indigenous Mental Health Programs 64
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Access to Major Health Programs 66
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework 66
National Suicide Prevention Strategy (mainstream program with Indigenous component) 67
Evaluation of PBS Medicine Supply Arrangements for Remote Area Aboriginal Health Services
Under S100 of the National Health Act 68
Review of the Australian Government's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary Health Care
Program 69
Review of the National Indigenous Pneumococcal Influenza Immunisation Program, 2003 73
Review of the Implementation of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Eye Health
Program 74
Audit Report No. 15 2002-03: The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Program Follow Up
Audit 75
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Co-ordinated Care Trials, National Evaluation Summary 76
Evaluation of the Emotional and Social Well Being (Mental Health) Action Plan 76
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) 78
Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage Initiative: Performance Information Reporting 78
Implementation of the COAG Service Delivery Principles for Programs and Services for Indigenous
Australians 78
Income management and the Basicscard 78
Capacity development for Indigenous service delivery 78
HOME Advice and Reconnect 79
Formal Review of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing (NPARIH)
79
Evaluation of the Remote Service Delivery (RSD) National Partnership 79
Review of the National Urban and Regional Service Delivery Strategy for Indigenous Australians
(URS) 80
Reconciliation Australia 80
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
iv
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Youth in Communities 80
Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program, (SIHIP) 81
Safe Havens 81
Homelessness National Partnership 81
Community Development Employment Program (CDEP) 81
Petrol Sniffing Strategy (PSS) outcome evaluation 81
Regional Partnership Agreement evaluation 81
Targeted Community Care (Mental Health) Program (Phase 2) 82
Substance Abuse Intelligence Desk Review 82
Food Security Pilot Study 82
Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory evaluation 82
Better practice in Financial Management Program services 83
Native Title Representative Bodies Client Satisfaction Survey 83
Indigenous Parenting Support 83
Expansion Playgroups for Indigenous Families (Locational Supported and Intensive Supported
Playgroups) 84
Army Aboriginal Community Assistance Program (AACAP) 84
Cape York Welfare Reform evaluation- Stage 2 84
Cape York Welfare Reform evaluation - Stage 1: Implementation review of the Families
Responsibilities Commission (FRC) 84
Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI) 84
Review of the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse 85
Nation Building and Jobs Plan National Partnership 85
Social and Emotional Wellbeing of Indigenous Youth – Review of the evidence and its Implications
for policy and service provision 85
Torres Strait Regional Authority Major Infrastructure Program (MIP) Stages 3 and 4 85
Evaluation of the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands Multi-Sport Regional Participation
Agreement 86
Scoping study of the facility within which the APY Substance Misuse Residential and Mobile
Outreach Service is situated 86
Review of Certain FaHCSIA-funded Youth Services 87
Research into Legislation Relating to Petrol Sniffing 87
Fixing Houses for Better Health 88
Home Ownership on Indigenous Land 89
Government Business Managers 89
Performance Audit of Indigenous Community Volunteers (ICV) 89
Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) 89
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
v
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Compendium of Petrol Sniffing Strategy-Related Evaluation Findings (2006-2010) 91
Review of the public awareness program 91
Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program – Review of Program Performance 91
Performance Audit of the International Repatriation Program 92
Performance Audit of the Indigenous Leadership Program 92
Evaluation of the Capacity Development Program of the Office of the Registrar of Indigenous
Corporations 93
Review of the Central Australian Petrol Sniffing Strategy Unit (CAPSSU) 94
Report on the evaluation of income management in the Northern Territory 94
Report on the NTER Redesign Engagement Strategy and Implementation 95
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Finfish Fishery 96
Performance Audit of the Northern Land Council - Governance Component - Report on
Recommendations 96
Performance Audit of the Northern Territory Land Councils 97
Performance Audit of Centrecorp Aboriginal Investment Corporation Pty Ltd 97
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA) Development Plan 97
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Development Plan 97
Report of the NTER Review Board 98
Analysis of performance of Indigenous students / Program for International Student Assessment
(PISA) 99
Review of the first phase of the Petrol Sniffing Strategy 99
Aboriginals Benefit Account (ABA) 99
Evaluation of Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) 100
Implementation Review of Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) 100
Review of Communities in Crisis 101
Implementation Review of Indigenous Coordination Centres 101
A Red Tape Evaluation in Selected Indigenous Communities 102
Stronger Families and Communities Strategy 2004-08 103
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Regional Authority Economic Development Program 103
Indigenous Community Housing Organisations 104
Review of Individual Shared Responsibility Agreements 104
Evaluations of the Eight COAG Trial Sites and Synopsis Review 105
Audit of the TSRA Administrative and Performance Functions 105
Waarvah Project Evaluation 106
National Aboriginal Health Strategy delivery of Housing and Infrastructure to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Communities Follow-up Audit 106
Evaluation of Aboriginal Hostels Limited 107
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
vi
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Indigenous Family Violence: Phase 1 Meta-Evaluation Report 107
‘I’m looking at the future’ Evaluation Report of Reconnect 108
Evaluation of the Link Up Program 108
Family and Community Network Initiative 109
ATSIC/ATSIS (to July 2004) - Putting the pieces together: Regional plans, data and outcomes 109
Audit Report No. 28 2002-03: Northern Territory Land Councils and the Aboriginals Benefit
Account 110
Audit Report No. 48 2002-03: Indigenous Land Corporations – Operations and Performance
Follow-up Audit 111
Audit Report No.13 2003–04: Performance Audit of ATSIS Law and Justice Program 111
Outcome data measurement: Unfinished business 111
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination
vii
June 2010

Introduction
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Directory of Indigenous and mainstream evaluations 2002-2010 identifies evaluation of programs or
strategies commissioned or undertaken by Commonwealth Government departments. The directory
captures any significant Indigenous-specific evaluations or mainstream evaluations with a prominent
Indigenous component.
In consultation with relevant government departments and agencies, the directory includes evaluations
for the preceding eight years. This directory dates back to 2002 and also includes planned evaluations.
The purpose of the directory is to provide readers with a ready reference to, and better understanding
of, the evaluation work that has and is taking place, on Indigenous programs and future evaluations.
The directory provides summaries of the evaluations, their scope, and their main findings.
This will be the last of these directories as the responsibility for collecting this information now lies with
the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse.
The Closing the Gap Clearinghouse broadly aims to provide policy makers and service providers with
evidence on what works to close the gap in Indigenous disadvantage.
Importantly, the Clearinghouse will produce an annual report on gaps in the available research and
evaluation evidence and priorities for future research. This can be accessed on the Clearinghouse
website. The Clearinghouse will determine gaps in the available evidence through analysis of its
collected resources by building block and then against further criteria, including:
geographic location (and remoteness location)
population groups that participated in the studies
the types of study used to produce the evidence
involvement of Indigenous researchers
the source of the research or evaluation
whether information was publically available.
The internet address of the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse is: http://www.aihw.gov.au/closingthegap/
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 1
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Australian National Audit Office
The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) independently audits public sector administrative
performance and accountability regimes to measure efficiency and effectiveness, make
recommendations for improvements and inform Parliament.
As a specialist public sector agency, the ANAO provides a full range of audit services to the Parliament,
Australian Government public sector entities and statutory bodies, as well as government corporations.
The ANAO assists the Auditor-General to provide an independent view of the performance and financial
management of public sector entities.
Between 2002 and 2007 the ANAO conducted audits of Indigenous programs including:
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 2
June 2010
Audit Report No. 1 2006-07: Administration of the Native Title Respondents Funding Scheme
Audit Report No. 43 2001-02: Indigenous Education Strategies
Implementation and Management of the Indigenous Employment Policy
Audit Report No. 15 2002-03: The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Program Follow Up
Audit
Municipal Services for Indigenous Communities: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission
National Aboriginal Health Strategy Delivery of Housing and Infrastructure to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Communities Follow-up Audit
Audit Report No. 28 2002-03: Northern Territory Land Councils and the Aboriginals Benefit
Account
Audit Report No. 48 2002-03: Indigenous Land Corporations – Operations and Performance
Follow-up Audit
Audit Report No.13 2003–04: Performance Audit of ATSIS Law and Justice Program
Details of these audits can be found under the relevant line agency listing.
In December 2009, the functions of the former Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA) were transferred
from the Department of Finance and Deregulation to the ANAO. As a consequence, the ANAO’s
performance audit program will be enhanced to include a greater number of audits focusing on
Indigenous-specific programs in addition to audits of other programs which have an identified
Indigenous-specific outcome or component.
In 2010–11, the Auditor-General expects to table in the Parliament and/or publish:
56 performance audits (including cross-agency audits);
four better practice guides; and
one Defence Materiel Organisation Major Projects Report.
Website: The 2010-11 ANAO work program can be found at:
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/Audit_Work_Program_July2010.pdf
Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Prior to 2009, when the functions of the former Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
(OEA) were transferred from the Department of Finance and Deregulation to the ANAO, the role of the
OEA was to support improvements in performance and public accountability of programs specifically

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
designed to further the social, economic or cultural development of Aboriginal persons or Torres Strait
Islanders.
This was achieved by conducting a regular program of independent, objective and systematic
evaluations and audits of:
relevant programs administered by Australian Government bodies;
related aspects of the operations of Australian Government bodies delivering those programs;
particular activities of organisations and individuals funded under those programs when
requested by the Minister; and
organisations and individuals where funding or loan agreement provides for evaluation or audit
by OEA (IP) and where the Minister consents to the evaluation or audit.
Completed OEA evaluations during 2002-2007 include:
Evaluation of the Legal and Preventative Services Program
Family Violence Prevention Legal Services Programme
National Arts and Crafts Industry Support
Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme – Away-from-Base for ‘Mixed-mode’
Delivery [IESIP-AFB]
An Effectiveness Audit of Maintenance and Protection of Indigenous Heritage
Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services
Croc Festivals
Evaluation of the Link Up Program
Evaluation of Aboriginal Hostels Limited
Indigenous Community Housing Organisations
Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA) Evaluation
Torres Strait Regional Authority
Evaluation: Putting the pieces together: Regional plans, data and outcomes
Outcome data measurement: Unfinished business
Family Violence Regional Activities Programme and Family Violence Partnership Programme,
Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA).
Indigenous Business Australia, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR).
National Arts and Craft Industry Support Programme, Department of Communication,
Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA).
Indigenous Legal Aid Services, Attorney General’s Department (AGD).
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 3
June 2010

Performance audits:
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Telecommunications Action Plan for Remote Indigenous Communities (TAPRIC) - Community
Phones Programme, Department of Communication, Information Technology and the Arts
(DCITA).
Aboriginal Rental Housing Programme, Department of Families, Community Services and
Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA).
Community Development Employment Projects programme (CDEP) Organisations, Department
of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR).
Community Development Employment Projects programme (CDEP) Performance Information,
Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR).
Organisations Funded Under the Native Title Programme, Department of Families, Community
Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA).
Indigenous Land Corporation, Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous
Affairs (FaCSIA).
Prevention, Diversion, Rehabilitation and Restorative Justice Programme. Attorney General’s
Department (AGD).
Centrelink Agents, Department of Human Services (DHS).
Indigenous Small Business Fund, Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR).
Indigenous Coordination Centres, Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous
Affairs (FaCSIA).
Governance Audits:
Third Party Funding Agreements.
Community Development Employment Projects programme, Torres Strait Regional Authority
(TSRA)
Details of these audits can be found under the relevant line agency listing.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 4
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Attorney-General’s Department (AGD)
Indigenous Law and Justice Program Evaluations
Year: 2010
In August 2009 the Commonwealth Attorney-General the Hon Robert McClelland MP committed $2
million funding to evaluate the effectiveness of Indigenous law and justice programs under the National
Indigenous Law and Justice Framework (the Framework).
The purpose of the evaluations is to develop a strong body of evidence regarding the effectiveness of a
range of justice programs in achieving the Goals set out in the Framework:
Improvement in Australian justice systems so that they comprehensively deliver on the justice
needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in a fair and equitable manner.
Reduction in the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander offenders,
defendants and victims within the criminal justice system.
Ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples feel safe and are safe within their
communities
Increased safety and a reduction in offending within Indigenous communities by addressing
alcohol and substance abuse
Strengthened Indigenous communities through working in partnership with governments and
other stakeholders to achieve sustained improvements in justice and community safety
The first tranche of evaluations will focus on Indigenous youth and perpetrator programs.
Prisoner Through-care Reviews
Year: 2010
The Department will undertake an external review of 12 Indigenous prisoner through-care projects
funded under the Indigenous Justice Program to assess their impact and effectiveness. The reviews will
also suggest improvements at the individual project level and collectively at the jurisdiction level. This is
part of the Department's review of all prisoner through-care projects funded under the Indigenous
Justice Program.
The 12 projects are located in Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and
the Northern Territory. The reviews will ensure funded organisations provide targeted, intensive
Indigenous prisoner through-care services. The reviews will also determine the most effective
Australian Government funding and service delivery arrangements for each jurisdiction, including
streamlining arrangements.
The proposed consultancy is strategically significant and will contribute to the evidence of what works
in relation to the COAG Closing the Gap Framework for the Safe Communities building block.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 5
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Performance Audit of the Northern Territory Night Patrols
Program
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Australian National Audit Office
The Australian National Audit Office commenced a review of night patrol services in the Northern
Territory in March 2010. The review is expected to be completed by the end of 2010. The objective of
the review is to assess the administrative effectiveness of the Attorney General's Department’s
management of night patrol services in the Northern Territory.
The review will assess whether the Department has in place administrative arrangements that support
the achievement of program objectives, including during the implementation of new service delivery
arrangements in 2008. It will also consider whether the administration of night patrols is consistent with
service delivery standards for Indigenous programs and the COAG Indigenous Service Delivery
Principles.
Law and Justice Advocacy Development (LJAD) Program
Year: 2009-10
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration (now ANAO)
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/evaluation_of_the_law_and_justice_advocacy_d
evelopment_program.pdf
The objectives of the evaluation were to assess the effectiveness of the LJAD program and the
efficiency of the Department’s funding and monitoring arrangements.
Legal Aid for Indigenous Australians (LEGA) Program
Year: 2008-09
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration (now ANAO)
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/evaluation_of_the_legal_aid_for_indigenous_au
stralians_program.pdf
The overall objective of the evaluation was to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the
management and operations of the LEGA Program.
Prevention, Diversion, Rehabilitation and Restorative Justice
(PDRR) Program
Year: 2008
Auditor: The former Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au
The Indigenous Justice Program (the Program) is a small supplementary program providing funding for
culturally relevant projects that help respond to the urgent challenge of the accelerating rate of
Indigenous offending and incarceration, and help achieve safer communities.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 6
June 2010

Terms of Reference
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The audit assessed the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the Program and its delivery by grant
funded external service providers, many of whom are Indigenous, and also identified areas where
performance could be enhanced.
Findings/Program enhancements
The audit concluded that service providers were highly committed to reducing Indigenous people’s
adverse contact with the criminal justice system, and that the Department’s administration of the
Program ensured service providers were financially accountable and complied with their contract
obligations.
The audit also identified some challenges, including:
development of a performance framework
Service Standards and revised performance indicators, that specify operational benchmarks and
targets, have been developed and implemented, and will shortly be internally reviewed in line
with a continuous improvement approach
project performance monitoring has been implemented, including regular site visits
further rigour in the assessment and selection of projects for funding, including identification of
Government priorities, gaps and duplications
funding assessment now factors in relevant Government policies, such as the Remote Service
Delivery Strategy, and targets key strategic gaps and duplications on the ground, within its
capacity
seeking more flexible multi-year funding capacity
the Program now has the capacity to fund projects for up to three years, reducing the
administrative burden and supporting the realisation of measurable outcomes.
Audit Report No. 1 2006-07: Administration of the Native Title
Respondents Funding Scheme
Year: 2006
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2006%2007_audit_report_17.pdf
Terms of Reference
The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Attorney General Department’s (AGD)
administration of grants provided under the Respondents Scheme. The audit considered the context
within which the Respondents Scheme operates and focused on assessing the administration of the
scheme including its financial management within AGD.
Findings
Comprehensive recommendations were made regarding the Native Title Respondents Funding Scheme.
ANAO has recommended that AGD improve its management of the scheme. Specific recommendations
were made in relation to performance management, risk management, effective and efficient use of
Government resources, data management, decision making tools, and financial management. AGD has
agreed to all of these recommendations.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 7
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Family Violence Prevention Legal Services Programme
Year: 2006
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration
Family Violence Prevention Legal Services (FVPLS) provide holistic assistance in the form of legal
services, information, counselling, referral and practical support for victims of family violence. They
may also undertake preventative initiatives, such as community education and programmes for children
and youth.
Terms of Reference
The objective of the audit is to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of the administration of the
FVPLS programme and the FVPLS units in delivering services including:
Findings
Assessing the actual extent of the implementation of the recommendations contained in an
OEA Report issued in April 2004
Reviewing the process for determining the location of the additional 13 FVPLS units.
The audit noted the following:
All four FVPLS units visited were achieving the desired outcomes to varying degrees
Two FVPLS units were achieving very good outcomes in the community and their services were
being marketed well through initiatives
One FVPLS unit required increased awareness and acceptance by the community it is intended
to service, together with improved administrative operations
The remaining FVPLS unit had moved from an unsatisfactory auspicing arrangement to
incorporation from 1 July 2005 and was demonstrating positive improvement.
There is also a need to aggregate the 26 FVPLS Quarterly Performance Reports into a National
Consolidated Quarterly Performance Report which will enable the Programme Manager to effectively
monitor and manage the programme in accordance with the yearly funding outcomes targets and the
Operational Framework priorities.
Native Title Claims Resolution Review
Year: 2006
Evaluators: Mr Graham Hiley QC and Dr Ken Levy
Website:
http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Indigenouslawandnativetitle_Nativetitle_Claimsresolutio
nreview
The Native Title Claims Resolution Review was established by former Attorney-General
the Hon Philip Ruddock MP to consider the process by which native title applications are resolved. The
Review examined the roles of the National Native Title Tribunal (NNTT) and the Federal Court and
considered measures for the more efficient management of native title claims within the existing
framework of the Native Title Act 1993 (the Act).
Two independent consultants were appointed to the review: Mr Graham Hiley QC and Dr Ken Levy. The
consultants were overseen by a Steering Committee comprising a member of the NNTT, the Registrar of
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 8
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
the Federal Court, an officer of the Attorney-General’s Department and an officer of the then Office of
Indigenous Policy Coordination.
The consultants undertook extensive consultation with a broad range of native title stakeholders,
including the Native Title Representative Bodies (NTRBs), State and Territory governments and
respondent bodies, including industry and pastoral representatives. The consultants also considered 36
written submissions to the Review.
The Review commenced in October 2005. The consultants provided their report to the former
Attorney-General on 31 March 2006. The former Government released the Report of the Review and
the Government response to the Review on 21 August 2006.
Terms of Reference
The Review examined and reported on the relationship between the NNTT and the Federal Court and
considered:
Findings
the dispute resolution functions of the Federal Court and the NNTT under the Act and the
effectiveness and efficiency of each body in performing those functions
how the Federal Court and the NNTT processes could be improved in order to encourage
agreement-making to resolve native title claims in preference to full litigation of claims, as well
as to reduce the amount of time and resources taken to resolve native title matters whether in
negotiation or litigation
whether greater consistency of practice, both within and between the Federal Court and the
NNTT, was desirable and achievable
whether, and if so the extent to which, there was a duplication of functions between the NNTT
and the Federal Court under the Act and in practice
whether there was a need to clarify and/or reassign the functions of the Federal Court and the
NNTT to maximise the effectiveness and efficiency of the relationship in order to encourage
greater outcomes from the native title system or whether there was any capacity for greater
flexibility in the allocation of functions between the two bodies or in the roles they play in
particular claims, and
how the gathering of evidence in the native title claim process could best be undertaken, and
what roles the NNTT and the Federal Court should play in this process. In looking at this issue,
the Review considered whether and in what circumstances the inquiry power under section 137
of the Act could be used to enable the more effective disposition of claims.
The Report of the Review contained 24 recommendations, broadly relating to:
improving and streamlining the mediation process
a new inquiry function for the NNTT
introducing an obligation of good faith and a code of conduct for parties involved in native title
mediation
increasing use of NNTT research and reports
streamlining registration processes
clarifying authorisation provisions
increasing flexibility in relation to notification
how to deal with particular types of claims, such as unregistered claimant applications
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 9
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
amending and clarifying provisions about who could be a party to a claim (e.g. considering
allowing industry bodies to intervene in a representative capacity), and
other improvements to case management (e.g. the Federal Court convening regular user group
meetings and regional call-overs involving the NNTT, and better particularisation of proceedings
at an earlier stage).
The key measure recommended was giving increased mediation powers to the NNTT. This and other
measures to implement the former Government’s response to the Review were included in the Native
Title Amendment Act 2007.
The former Attorney-General also approved a set of guidelines for mediation in the NNTT. The
guidelines set out principles of good practice and standards of behaviour and complement the new
requirement in the Act for parties and their representatives to act in good faith in relation to the
conduct of mediation, as recommended by the Review. Other recommendations made by the Review
were implemented administratively, including by the Federal Court and the NNTT.
As a result of ongoing stakeholder feedback about institutional arrangements between the Federal
Court and the NNTT, the current Attorney-General, the Hon Robert McClelland MP, introduced the
Native Title Amendment Act 2009 into Parliament on 19 March 2009. The Amendment Act commenced
on 18 September 2009. It effected institutional reform by giving the Federal Court the central role in
managing claims, by allowing it to determine which individual or body can best mediate each claim,
including amendments to the Court’s power to make orders about the way in which mediation is to be
provided, what assistance may be provided to the mediator, other matters it considers relevant when
referring a matter for mediation, and whether mediation should cease. Additional measures contained
in the Amendment Act gave the Court the power to: make separate orders about matters beyond
native title, rely on a statement of facts agreed between parties, and use recent evidence law changes
so that oral evidence of traditional laws and customs is no longer treated as prima facie inadmissible.
The Amendment Act also made minor amendments to provisions concerning NTRBs, including
recognition.
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Agreement
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website:
http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Publications_TheFinalReportoftheEvaluationoftheNorth
ernTerritoryAgreement-April2004
Terms of Reference
The Agreement between the Commonwealth and Northern Territory Governments concerns the
establishment of the Juvenile Pre-Court Diversion Program and Aboriginal Interpreter Service (AIS).
The evaluation aimed to:
measure the effectiveness of the Agreement in diverting juveniles from the criminal justice
system
measure the quality of all components of the Diversion Scheme
measure the effectiveness of the Agreement in alleviating language barriers
assess the NT Government’s efforts in meeting the specifics of the Agreement and compliance
with police general orders
assess the impact that the Review of the Juvenile Justice Act has had on the Agreement
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 10
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
identify any unintended outcomes of the Agreement, both positive and negative
identify short to long term data requirements for planning and policy development purposes for
the future
identify problems or areas which require improvement and gaps in knowledge where further
work is required
make recommendations for improvement.
The evaluation found that the Aboriginal Interpreter Service (AIS) has had a significant impact on
enhancing access to services and promoting the well-being of Aboriginal people in the Northern
Territory. Benefits found of the AIS included: more effective representation from lawyers; Aboriginal
people feeling much more comfortable in legal situations and more able to provide information and
instructions; and increased access to appropriate medical care. Challenges for the service included: the
pool of AIS interpreters is still insufficient to meet the needs of current users; quality of interpreters is
variable; use of the AIS is still patchy across many government and non-government services; and AIS
has yet to be recognised as a core part of all NT government service delivery. The report details a
number of suggested strategies for strengthening the AIS and further increasing access of Aboriginal
people to interpreters.
The evaluation demonstrated that the juvenile diversion scheme had a positive impact in reducing the
number of young people coming before the courts. The majority of juveniles (78%) who completed
diversion were not apprehended within 12 months of the initial apprehension, and the recidivism rate of
this group is lower than that of juveniles who went to court. The number of juveniles appearing and
convicted before the court dropped significantly in the first two years of the scheme and are still at a
level significantly lower than the period before the diversion scheme was introduced.
Other benefits of the scheme found in the evaluation included: a positive impact on the lives of some
young people, a high level of victim satisfaction, consistency in the application of diversionary measures
and an enhanced perception of NT Police.
Challenges for the scheme include: it is working far less effectively with Indigenous than non-Indigenous
juveniles; a number of attitudinal, operational, structural and other issues are impeding its effective
operation; and there are variations in the approach, quality and range of case management services
provided. The report details a number of suggested strategies to address these and other issues which
are designed to strengthen and improve the effectiveness of the juvenile diversion scheme.
Evaluation of the Legal and Preventative Services Program
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Website: http://anao.gov.au/Publications/Indigenous-Program-Reports/2002-2003/Evaluation-of-the-
Legal-and-Preventative-Services-Program
Terms of Reference
To assess the outputs and outcomes of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Legal Services
(ATSILS).
To benchmark the cost of providing ATSILS against mainstream Legal Aid Commissions (LACs).
To benchmark the standard of service provision of ATSILS against mainstream LACs
To assess the equity of Legal and Preventative Services Programs (LPSP) to ATSILS
Examine the progress of LPSP in prioritising funds to preventative and rehabilitative functions.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 11
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
ATSILS provide legal work at a significantly lower cost than that paid by mainstream LACs. There is no
significant difference in client satisfaction between ATSIL and LAC clients; both have a high degree of
client dissatisfaction. ATSIL practitioners suffer from low morale and high staff turnover. ATSIL clients
and LAC Indigenous clients are more likely to plead guilty than mainstream offenders. This is partly
explained by communication and contact problems with highly mobile clients in more remote
communities, and generally limited time and resources. ATSILS represented 89% of Indigenous legal aid
cases. There are more Indigenous staff in ATSILS (56%) than in LACs (2%). The majority of Indigenous
prisoners (83%) did not have anyone present to support them when first interviewed by police.
While LACs are a ‘supplementary provider’ of legal services for Indigenous people, there is an undercount
of the number of Indigenous clients they serve and there is ‘considerable room for improvement’.
Indigenous clients account for 6% of LAC cases. LAC practitioners are less likely to have received recent
training in Indigenous cultural awareness. The data management system for ATSILS is still not
functioning in NSW. Among ATSILS, there is a high level of dissatisfaction with the four areas of ASTIC
reforms discussed in this evaluation. ATSIC needs to seriously address the high workloads, staff
turnover, and low morale in ATSILS.
Review of the Northern Territory Agreement
Year: 2002
Evaluator: Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department and the Northern Territory Government
Website:
http://www.ema.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/Publications_TheReviewoftheNorthernTerritoryAgree
ment-December2002
Terms of Reference
This review occurred one year after the commencement of the Agreement between the
Commonwealth and Northern Territory Governments, to establish the Juvenile Pre-Court Diversion
Program and Aboriginal Interpreter Service (AIS).
The objectives of the review were to identify:
key achievements in the first 12 months of the Agreement;
the impact of the diversion scheme and the Aboriginal Interpreter Service (AIS)
barriers to access to the scheme, or best outcomes from the scheme, and strategies to address
the barriers;
short, medium and long-term data requirements for planning and policy development; and
a basis on which to undertake the full evaluation of the Northern Territory Agreement in 2004.
Findings
Findings indicated the Agreement was showing early signs of success. Monitoring throughout the
reporting period (February to April 2002) showed that out of the 1,548 apprehension cases, 78% of
juveniles were offered diversion and of these, some 75% did not re-offend. During this time there was a
reduction in court appearances by juveniles of 31% for property offences and 51 % reduction in
convictions overall. There was also a reduction of 40% in detention/imprisonment orders for juveniles
for property offences.
The review also identified a range of issues needing attention including: more effective communication
about the scheme to stakeholders and the community as a whole; appropriate access to legal advice for
juveniles and their families, and adequate monitoring and reporting of various components of the
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 12
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
scheme; access to language interpreters; the provision of effective support to juveniles and their
families in the form of case management; and access to pre-court diversion for those living in remote
Aboriginal communities without a permanent police presence. The need for Aboriginal community
involvement in program development was also acknowledged.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 13
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional
Development and Local Government
East Kimberley Development Package
Year: 2010-11
Terms of Reference:
The Office of Northern Australia intends to undertake a review of the East Kimberley Development
Package’s implementation to date, and develop a framework for future evaluation of outcomes.
Remote Air Services Subsidy (RASS) Scheme
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government
Terms of Reference
The Terms of Reference for this evaluation have been agreed by the Minister, with the Review to be
conducted by the Department and due for completion by 31 December 2010. The Review will identify
and consider alternate structures for RASS Scheme services, focussing on those options outlined in the
Aviation White Paper.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 14
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Broadband, Communications and the
Digital Economy
Community Phones Program – Telecommunications Action Plan
for Remote Aboriginal Communities
Year: 2005-06
Evaluator: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Terms of reference
This evaluation is considering the appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency and community based
maintenance arrangements of the Community Phones Trial in meeting the telecommunications needs
of remote Indigenous communities against the funding provided.
Findings
An evaluation of the Community Phones Program is currently being undertaken. Stage 1 of the
evaluation was conducted in March-April 2006, and Stage 2 of the evaluation in
September-November 2006 with a report at the end of December 2006.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 15
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Education, Employment and
Workplace Relations
Two year review of remote employment servicing arrangements
under CDEP, IEP and JSA
Year: TBD
Smarter Schools National Partnerships (SSNPSs)- national
evaluation
Year: 2011-15
Evaluator: TBD
The evaluation of the SSNPs (Improving Teacher Quality, Low Socio-economic Status School
Communities, Literacy and Numeracy, and Closing the Gap elements bound by the SSNPs) will assess
the extent to which outcomes have been achieved, and identify and share best practice directions.
Evaluation of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Action Plan
Year: 2011-2014
Evaluator: TBD
1. Readiness for school
2. Engagement and connection
3. Attendance
4. Literacy and numeracy
5. Leadership, quality teaching and workforce development
6. Pathways to real post-school options
Evaluation of the reformed Indigenous Employment Program
Year: 2009 to 2014
Evaluator: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
Arrangements for the evaluation are still being developed. The purpose of the evaluation will be to
assess the impact of the Indigenous Employment Program (IEP) on Indigenous Australians’ employment
outcomes and participation in economic activities. The evaluation will attempt to determine if IEP is
achieving its objectives. This includes its contribution to halving the gap by 2018 in employment
outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Where possible, the evaluation will
compare the performance of the reformed IEP with the previous IEP model.
Findings of the evaluation will be progressively available. They will be used to inform future directions
of the program as well as best practice in the operation and delivery of the program.
The proposed evaluation strategy adopts a flexible approach, recognising that as the evaluation
progresses new issues will emerge while some of the issues identified as significant at the outset will
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 16
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
become less important over time. This approach also recognises the current uncertainties on the timing
of data.
Evaluation of Indigenous servicing under Job Services Australia
Year: 2009 to 2013
Evaluator: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
The evaluation will assess services provided and outcomes achieved for Indigenous clients under Job
Services Australia, as part of the overall evaluation of Job Services Australia being undertaken from
2009 to 2013. A significant focus of the evaluation is identifying the contribution of Job Services
Australia to halving the employment gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, and
whether this can be isolated from the contributions of other employment initiatives for Indigenous job
seekers.
The evaluation will be undertaken in two phases, with Phase 1 due to be completed by the end of 2010
and the second phase completed by mid-2013. Results will be available progressively and the associated
evaluation reports will be made public at the Minister’s discretion.
National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions
Year: 2009-13
Evaluator: TBD
This project will evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency, and governance arrangements
of the National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions and its elements. Formative elements
will provide advice to policy makers and program managers, and summative elements will assess the
extent to which the National Partnership has achieved its goals which are to:
1. achieve a national Year 12 or equivalent attainment rate of 90 per cent by 2015
2. provide an education or training entitlement to young people aged 15-24
3. better engage young people in education and training
4. assist young people aged 15-24 to make a successful transition from schooling into further
education, training or employment
5. better align Commonwealth, State and Territory programs and services related to youth,
careers and transitions.
Evaluation of the reforms to the Job Capacity Assessment
Year: 2011-13
Evaluator: TBD
The evaluation will assess the effectiveness, efficiency and appropriateness of the new employment
assessments.
Trade Training Centres (TTCs) in schools Program
Year: 2011-2013
Evaluator: TBD
Activity towards the evaluation of the TTC programs will commence in 2011 with the development of the
Terms of Reference for evaluation of the program over 2012-2013. The evaluation will also be supported
by annual reports, including data supplied by TTC schools.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 17
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of Disability Employment Services
Year: 2010-12
Evaluator: TBD
The evaluation will measure use of Disability Employment Services by Indigenous Australians and
investigate any barriers that prevent engagement with services.
Indigenous Economic Participation National Partnership (Element
1)
Year: 2010-2011
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
The objective of the Indigenous Employment in Government Service Delivery audit is to assess the
effectiveness and efficiency of FaHCSIA’s and DEEWR’s administration of the Australian Government’s
responsibilities under Element 1 of the National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic
Participation. The ANAO will examine whether:
Arrangements and ongoing procedures have been established that support the achievement of
outputs as outlined in Element 1 of the NPA, including the identification, selection and funding
of jobs;
Effective transitional strategies have been developed and implemented; and
Regular monitoring and reporting on the initiative is undertaken and monitoring information is
used to make adjustments and inform future decision making.
Multifunctional Aboriginal Children’s Services (MACS) and
Crèches
Year: 2010-11
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Uploads/Documents/2010%2011_audit_report_no_8.pdf
The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR’s administrative arrangements supporting the delivery
of Indigenous childcare services through MACS and crèches, including the approaches DEEWR uses to
monitor the achievement of the Budget-Based Funding (BBF) sub-program objective.
In conducting the audit, the ANAO reviewed three key areas:
program administration—DEEWR’s administrative systems and processes supporting the
delivery of Indigenous childcare services through MACS and crèches and the broader BBF subprogram;
management of service provider funding agreements—DEEWR's systems and processes for
managing MACS and crèche service providers’ funding agreements; and
monitoring and reporting performance—the effectiveness of DEEWR’s processes for
monitoring the performance of service providers, and the achievement of the outputs and
outcomes of the BBF sub-program.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 18
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Indigenous Boarding Facilities and Indigenous Boarding Hostels
Partnership Program
Year: 2010-11
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audits-in-Progress/2010-2011/Indigenous-Boarding-
Facilities-and-Indigenous-Boarding-Hostels-Partnership-Program
The audit will assess if the planning and consultation phases for the development and delivery of
boarding facilities have been effectively managed.
Review of higher education access and outcomes for Indigenous
people
Year: 2010-11
Preparation has begun for a review of higher education access and outcomes for Indigenous people, in
line with Recommendation 30 of the Review of Australian Higher Education (Bradley Review):
‘That the Australian Government regularly review the effectiveness of measures to improve
higher education access and outcomes for Indigenous people in consultation with the
Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council.’
Planning is taking place in consultation with the Indigenous Higher Education Advisory Council (IHEAC),
which provides policy advice to Government on enhancing participation and outcomes for Indigenous
students and staff in study, research, research training and employment in higher education.
Parental and Community Engagement (PaCE) Program
Year: 2010-11
The PaCE Program is a community driven program which focuses on the development and
implementation of creative and innovative approaches to improve the educational outcomes of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander school students through enhancing parental engagement with
schools and education providers.
The PaCE Program supports Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander families and communities to ‘reach-in’
to schools and education providers and to develop partnerships with them with the aim of enhancing
their children’s educational outcomes. It also aims to enhance the capacity of parents to support and
reinforce their children’s learning at home.
Terms of Reference
The objectives of the evaluation will be to assess the effectiveness of the program in achieving its
stated objectives, to provide the department with an analysis of that information, identify good practice
examples, describe key factors for success and provide other information to the department to assist it
in its consideration of the delivery of the program.
Evaluation of the Jobs and Training Compact
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: TBD
The evaluation will include consideration of how Indigenous Australians were affected by the Jobs and
Training Compact.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 19
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
STEP and Wage Assistance: A net impact study: Off benefit
outcomes measured to August 2007
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
A net impact (a measure of program effectiveness) study on the Structured Training and Employment
Projects (STEP) and Wage Assistance under the Indigenous Employment Program is being finalised by
the Department. The public release of the results will be at the discretion of the Government.
Audit of the Expansion of the Intensive Literacy and Numeracy
Programs and Individual Learning
Year: 2010
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office
One of the key targets under the Government’s Closing the Gap Initiative is to ‘halve the gap in literacy
and numeracy achievement between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and other students
within a decade’. The Government allocated $56.4 million over four years to 2011–12 under the Closing
the Gap initiative for the expansion of intensive literacy and numeracy programs and to ensure that
every Indigenous student has an individual learning plan. Both of these components were expected to
start in schools at the beginning of the 2009 academic year. A key objective of this measure is to identify
programs demonstrating the biggest improvements to Indigenous educational outcomes, such as the
National Accelerated Literacy Program, and then expand and integrate them into schools. An audit
would examine the management and implementation of this measure, including the process for
identifying high-performing numeracy and literacy programs, and the planning and design processes
involved in expanding and integrating the programs into schools.
Early Childhood Education National Partnership
Year: 2010-14
Evaluation of the Community Festivals for Education Engagement
Program
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Cultural & Indigenous Research Centre Australia
Terms of Reference
Appropriateness
Is the program consistent with current Australian Government priorities?
What is the nature and extent of community needs or problems being addressed by the
program?
What would be the likely consequences if this program did not exist?
Are other Australian Government agencies, states or territories addressing this need? Is there
potential for improved alignment or integration?
What does the program add which extends the already existing government response to this
need? How is this program unique?
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 20
June 2010

Effectiveness
Efficiency
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Has the multi-provider model achieved more effective outcomes compared to when there was a
single event organiser?
To what extent do the Community Festivals address the identified need of the program?
Are the current key performance indicators the most effective available for future development
of the program?
Are there other outcomes of the program, including any unanticipated positive or negative
outcomes?
Has the multi-provider model achieved more cost effective outputs compared to when there
was a single event organiser?
To what extent have program inputs been minimised, or outputs maximised; to achieve the
program’s intended outcomes?
What outcomes are achieved in return for Australian Government investments?
What is the likely extent of community support for the program by way of funds or in-kind
contributions?
Good Governance
Findings
How well does the Community Festivals for Education Engagement Program fit into the
“Closing the Gap” agenda?
Who are the target participants of the program and how has the program been equitably
promoted to these participants?
To what extent do appropriate control mechanisms ensure that selection and approval
processes are fair, accountable, consistent and transparent?
The evaluation report concluded that the 2009 Community Festivals program was successful in terms of
appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency and good governance.
The report noted that the multi-provider model allowed festival producers to draw on their individual
skills.
Events take place in regional and remote areas where few, if any, comparable events take place. This
enables students in these areas to participate in festival activities that are designed to promote the
benefits of education and the adoption of healthy and positive lifestyles.
There is some scope for improvement, in particular the need to enhance the role of community
members in providing input and advice into the management of the festival.
Indigenous Languages Programmes in Australian Schools – A
Way Forward
Year: 2008
Evaluator: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER)
This project was funded through the Australian Government’s School Languages Program.
The project is directed towards strengthening the quality of Indigenous languages programs in schools.
The purpose of the project is to provide a snapshot of the current national situation in Indigenous
languages education in Australian schools.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 21
June 2010

The project involved:
Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
a comprehensive literature review of existing national and international research on Indigenous
languages and the delivery of Indigenous languages programs in schools;
a comprehensive mapping exercise to document:
o
o
o
current State and Territory policies and practices relating to Indigenous languages in
Australian schools;
numbers and types of Indigenous languages programs currently being delivered in
schools in each State and Territory and how these are staffed and funded; and
the range of training and professional learning options and/or teacher preparation
courses available to teachers and speakers of Indigenous languages in each State and
Territory to enable them to deliver such programs in schools;
an analysis of existing models of teacher preparation and/or training and professional learning
for those involved in, or wishing to become involved in the delivery of Indigenous languages
programs in schools, and an evaluation of their relevance and applicability to the Australian
context; and
six case studies of examples of good practice of Indigenous languages programs in schools
reflecting different settings.
The report makes 15 recommendations with a view to supporting the National Plan for Languages
Education in Australian Schools 2005-2008 as well as supporting the maintenance, revitalisation, and
rebuilding of Australia’s Indigenous languages.
Parent School Partnership Initiative Audit
Year: 2007-08
Evaluator: Australian National Audit Office
The Parent School Partnership Initiative (PSPI) was introduced in 2005 as one element of the Whole of
School Intervention Strategy (WoSI).
PSPI funds were used to focus on a range of strategic interventions – from school based initiatives to
improve attendance and retention, through to nutrition projects, community liaison and providing
additional support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents to actively engage in educational
decision making.
Findings
In summary, the ANAO made a number of recommendations regarding the PSPI element of the Whole
of School Intervention Strategy. They include:
reviewing the objectives to resolve overlap with other programs;
establishing performance indicators in relation to revised objectives;
improving the design of the program; and
strengthening the delivery of the program.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 22
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Performance Audit of the Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF)
and the Indigenous Capital Assistance Scheme (ICAS)
Year: 2007–08
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/oea/docs/OEA_ISBF-ICAS_report.pdf
The Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) (the Office) identified the Indigenous Small
Business Fund (ISBF) and the Indigenous Capital Assistance Scheme (ICAS) as programs to be reviewed
as part of its 2007–2010 Work Program. Both programs are administered by the Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR).
The aim of this performance audit was to:
assess the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the operation of the ISBF and ICAS
programs including DEEWR’s overall administration of the programs
identify the achievements of projects funded under the program, and determine the extent to
which project performance and outcomes have met the overall objectives of the ISBF and the
ICAS programs
identify any areas where performance can be improved.
The audit concluded that DEEWR has been successful in providing financial assistance to eligible
Indigenous businesses through the ISBF and ICAS programs. However, in the absence of adequate
performance information on the outcomes achieved by the ISBF and ICAS programs, it was not possible
for the Office to conclude on the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the program against stated
objectives. Both ISBF and ICAS are small compared to other programs administered by DEEWR under
the Indigenous Employment Policy (IEP) and the audit noted the similarities between these programs
and those managed by Indigenous Business Australia and state/territory governments.
Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF)
Year: 2007–08
Community Development Employment Projects Program
Year: 2007
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
The Office evaluated CDEP in 1997 and found that there were significant economic and social benefits of
participation in this programme.
This evaluation is to re-examine the management of the program and the program achievements to
provide assurance that the program is being delivered efficiently and effectively and to identify if there
is scope for improvement.
Indigenous employment delivered through a ‘whole-of-government’ approach is a key government
priority and this evaluation provides an opportunity to see what lessons can be learnt from previous
approaches that can be applied to improve future programme delivery.
The evaluation builds on previous reviews such as that done by Ian Spicer, the Performance Audits of a
number of CDEP service providers and CDEP performance information.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 23
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Indigenous Youth Employment Consultant
Programme
Year: 2007
Evaluator: Kate Sullivan & Associates Pty Ltd
The aim of the Evaluation of the Indigenous Youth Employment Consultant Programme was to assess
the performance of the IYEC programme, estimate its impact in assisting disengaged Indigenous youth
and provide recommendations for future directions of the programme. The evaluation noted the IYEC
programme is a strategic initiative that is both valued and greatly needed. It offers unique support in
education, training and employment and, the programme offers flexibility to provide young Indigenous
people desperately required one-on-one support. The evaluation recommended the need for ongoing
promotion and awareness of the programme, and the need for recruitment and retention of suitable
Indigenous Youth Employment Consultants.
Study of Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme and Whole of
School Intervention Strategy
Year: 2006-07
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Terms of Reference:
The objectives of the Study of Indigenous Tutorial Assistance Scheme (ITAS) and Study of the Whole of
School Intervention Strategy (WoSI) were to gather and provide to the Department information
relating to the effectiveness of the elements of ITAS and WoSI in achieving their stated objectives,
provide the Department with an analysis of that information; identify good practice examples, describe
key factors for success, and provide other information to the Department to assist in its consideration
of the delivery of ITAS and WoSI.
Findings:
In summary, Urbis Keys Young found:
both programs were good and achieving positive outcomes;
both programs could benefit from a more targeted approach;
there were implications for schools with small versus large populations;
a need to streamline reporting and paperwork requirements; and
a need for further marketing of key aspects to stakeholders.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 24
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives
Programme – Away-from-base for Mixed Mode delivery (IESIP-
AFB) programme
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/Evaluation_of_the_Indigenous_Education_Strategic_Initia
tives_Programme_-_Away-from-Base_for_Mixed_Mode_Delivery_(IESIP-AFB)_Report.pdf
The aim of the IESIP-AFB program is to promote access to tertiary education for Indigenous people
living in regional and remote areas. It is administered by the Department of Education, Science and
Training (DEST).
The program:
Mixed-mode distance education allows Indigenous students from remote and rural areas with family
and work obligations to go on living at home while they do tertiary study. Mixed-mode study involves a
combination of distance education and ‘residential’ periods of face-to-face teaching, either on-campus
or in the students’ home community as well as vocational placements.
The programme provides funding to eligible Institutions to cover travel costs for students undertaking
Mixed-mode studies.
Before year 2001 it was funded under ABSTUDY and was based on individual student applications.
Terms of Reference
The terms of the reference for the evaluation were:
Assess the effectiveness of the current funding measures in meeting the needs of students
enrolled in ‘mixed-mode’ courses with reference to the effectiveness of the IESIP-AFB
programme on improving educational outcomes for Indigenous students
Examine the compliance of education providers with 2001-04 IESIP-AFB accountability
mechanisms and guidelines.
The evaluation
The Department of Education, Science and Training manages the Indigenous Education Strategic
Initiatives Program – Away from Base for Mixed Mode Delivery. In 2004 the program provided
supplementary funding of $28 million to 32 tertiary institutions to meet the costs of travel and
accommodation for Indigenous students doing mixed mode courses. Between 2000-2004 there were
more than 29,000 enrolments for the scheme.
Before the introduction of the program in 2000, students in mixed mode courses applied directly to
Centrelink for assistance.
The Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) evaluated the program to measure whether
the new approach to funding was helping students get better results from their studies.
Findings
mixed mode courses offer a valuable and unique means for older Indigenous people in rural and
remote areas to gain access to education and make substantial contributions to their
communities and beyond
student enrolments grew by an average of six per cent each year from 2001 to 2004, while
enrolments among the broader ABSTUDY population declined
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 25
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Indigenous students valued mixed mode courses as an alternative pa th to gaining tertiary
qualifications. The program helped course providers to run effective mixed mode courses and
support students. Educational outcomes matched those of other Indigenous students and were
marginally better.
the program achieved its primary goals of improving access and participation by Indigenous
people in higher education, however evidence of anticipated improvements in educational
outcomes was mixed.
Factors affecting program outcomes:
managing the competing demands of family, community, work and study is an important
indicator of whether a student fails or withdraws from a course.
the funding method encouraged the providers of mixed mode courses to focus more on
enrolling students than ensuring students completed courses.
providers of mixed mode courses may have enrolled students who were not ready to
successfully complete courses.
course providers were encouraged to enrol local students to cross-subsidise the costs of high
cost students from interstate or remote areas.
course providers had not taken full advantage of the flexibility offered through the new funding
arrangements to introduce innovative means to overcome barriers to students starting and
completing courses, for example by strengthening options in information technology and
distance education.
Recommendations
The funding method should be reviewed to provide stronger incentives for institutions to achieve
educational outcomes as against enrolments.
Funding should be targeted to meet the needs of students from rural and remote areas, recognising
that some local students may be eligible for support under the program.
The Department should continue to monitor students’ educational outcomes to drive continuous
improvements and report these outcomes to Parliament.
The Department should implement a systematic risk-based post-payment checking regime to
complement quality assurance and accountability to ensure program guidelines and contractual
obligations are met.
Resources should not be diverted to meet the costs of services that would be more appropriately met
from alternative funding sources.
Review into the impact of the ABSTUDY policy changes that came
into effect in 2000
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Department of Education, Science and Training
Website: http://www.deewr.gov.au/Indigenous/Schooling/Programs/Pages/ABSTUDYChanges.aspx
In response to community concerns about the impact of changes made in 2000 to the ABSTUDY
scheme, the then Minister for Education, Science and Training, the Hon Dr Brendan Nelson MP, on 31
March 2004 approved the terms of reference for a review, to be undertaken by DEST.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 26
June 2010

Terms of Reference:
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The evaluation investigated the impact of policy changes to ABSTUDY in 2000 by examining a broad
range of factors, including contextual background factors, as well as policy and operational issues,
including:
Factors influencing the changes in Indigenous enrolment trends in higher education and other
educational sectors at the time of implementation of the policy changes.
What impact did underlying factors such as demographics and labour market conditions have on
education and training participation for Indigenous students?
The effect of policy and delivery changes, including changes in specific types of assistance, on
ABSTUDY recipients.
Did these changes, if any, affect the social, demographic or regional distribution of ABSTUDY
recipients?
Review of the Community Development Employment Projects
(CDEP) Program
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Department of Employment and Workplace Relations
On 6 November 2006 the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations the Hon Kevin
Andrews MP released the Indigenous Potential meets Economic Opportunity Discussion Paper. The
discussion paper outlined a new approach to Indigenous employment servicing in urban and major
regional centres. Changes would increase the focus on placement directly into jobs taking advantage of
the strong employment opportunities provided in these areas.
An extensive consultation process on the proposed changes outlined in the Indigenous Potential meets
Economic Opportunity Discussion Paper was conducted in November and December of 2006. The
Department received 70 written submissions and more than 1300 people attended 37 face-to-face
consultation sessions around the country. In general, respondents accepted the need for a different
service model, provided the transition is carefully managed. The proposal outlined in this discussion
paper was implemented on 1 July 2007. These changes provide more support to help Indigenous people
get off welfare and into a job.
Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) Program
Evaluations
Year: 2006
The Working for Families (WFF) Initiative was reviewed in August 2006. WFF provides 1000 places to
support projects related to addressing family violence and substance misuse problems and also
contributes to unsubsidised employment. The review recommended that the 1000 places of the WFF be
incorporated into the established CDEP program structure as it comprises only a small proportion of the
overall number of CDEP places and already uses the CDEP program structure. The review was accepted
and the program was extended as part of the 2007–08 Budget process.
The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, the Hon Kevin Andrews MP, launched the
Indigenous Potential meets Economic Opportunity – Discussion Paper (IPMEO) in November 2006. The
outcome of the IPMEO Discussion Paper led to the implementation of changes to CDEP on 1 July 2007.
These changes take advantage of the strong labour markets that exist across Australia, focus on helping
Indigenous Australians to achieve genuine economic independence and provide more support to help
Indigenous people get off welfare and into a job.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 27
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Funding for Community Development Employment Projects ceased in urban and major regional areas
with strong employment opportunities. In these locations, instead of CDEP, expanded Structured
Training and Employment Projects brokerage services operate in addition to the range of mainstream
employment and business support programs available to all Australians. In areas where CDEP continues,
CDEP service providers that place participants into jobs are rewarded with a 26 week Community
Employment Project Placement Initiative (CDEPPI) payment of $850 per outcome. In addition, the
allowable limits for CDEP participants have been lowered to increase the incentive for participants to
move into jobs.
The number of off-CDEP employment placements achieved by CDEP service providers has markedly
increased over the last three financial years, from 1575 in 2004–05 to 3074 in 2005–06 (first year of new
policy directions). In the 2006–07 financial year, 5770 off-CDEP employment placements were recorded,
a 56% increase over the preceding year.
Another policy direction was to reduce the proportion of non-Indigenous participants in the CDEP
program. CDEP service providers have successfully decreased the proportion of non-Indigenous
participants from seven per cent at the end of 2004–05 to two per cent at the end of 2006–07. This
exceeded the PBS target of three per cent.
Post-Implementation Review - Removal of Phase 1 Remote Area
Exemptions
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, Office of Indigenous Policy
Coordination and Centrelink
Terms of Reference
The purpose of the Post Implementation Review (PIR) is to examine the removal of Remote Area
Exemptions (RAEs) in Phase 1 communities, including:
the effectiveness of implementation models used
the strengths and weaknesses of each model
to identify any issues/problems
to identify examples of best practice which have arisen during implementation.
Participation exemptions had been removed from 549 individuals in seven remote communities. The
Post-Implementation Review showed that social and community impacts were mostly positive and
there was no evidence of negative impacts of compliance, nor major movements between communities
as a result of the removal of the Remote Areas Exemptions (RAEs).
While initial implementation was slow, a focused effort looking at further ways in which to facilitate the
removal of RAEs saw the progress speed up significantly.
Overall, implementation seems to work best in a whole of government environment that extends to
local arrangements and well-functioning relationships between all agencies are important.
Findings
The removal of RAEs is a highly resource intensive initiative given the nature of communicating
through community consultations, the distances travelled to get to communities throughout
implementation, access to communities being difficult for a range of reasons, and the need to
build the capacity of service providers to engage income support recipients in ongoing activities
the consultation/engagement process is very important
offering a range or complex participation options made the removal of RAEs less effective
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 28
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
a number of related issues - including IT systems, accommodation of cultural and sorry business,
mobility policy, and accuracy of payment/exemption types - need to be addressed
activities need to be structured within mainstream programs that have existing public liability
and personal accident coverage for participants.
Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA) audits of Community
Development Employment Projects (CDEP)
Year: 2006
The Office of Evaluation and Audit also conducted two CDEP audits during 2006.
Audit of CDEP organisations – finalised September 2006
Performance audit of CDEP performance information – in final draft stage
Summaries of these should be sought from the Office of Evaluation and Audit
Evaluation of Australians Working Together
Year: 2005
Evaluator: Department of Employment Workplace Relations
Website:
http://www.workplace.gov.au/workplace/Publications/ProgrammeEvaluation/AustraliansWorkingToget
her-ReportNovember2005.htm
Terms of Reference
The Government announced the Australians Working Together (AWT) package in the 2001-02
Commonwealth Budget. The package had the following overarching objectives:
increasing self- reliance through economic participation (principally through paid employment)
and social participation (which can assist transition to economic participation)
generating opportunities and supporting economic and social participation through
governments, communities and businesses working together
building a social safety net that is more responsive to individual circumstances.
The purpose of the evaluation of Australians Working Together was to assess, as far as possible,
whether the package of measures and initiatives was effective in meeting its objectives of increasing
participation and decreasing income support reliance among working age income support recipients.
Four key target groups were identified in the evaluation: Indigenous Australians; mature age job
seekers; parents with children; and people with disabilities.
Findings
Evaluation reports are available on the website. The Australians Working Together Report, October
2005 showed that the initiative was an important first step towards increasing participation of the
working age income support population and highlighted the potential gains that could be achieved by
new participation requirements. It also pointed to the benefits of establishing closer links between
Indigenous job seekers and mainstream non-Indigenous employment services. The report shows that
gains could be made in reducing Indigenous unemployment by encouraging Indigenous job seekers to
participate more fully in the job market. The positive response to the AWT initiative among Indigenous
communities helped set the scene for the Government’s reforms to the Community Development and
Employment Projects (CDEP) program, which were introduced in early 2005, along with other reform
measures.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 29
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of the Community Development Employment Projects
(CDEP) Program
Year: 2005
Evaluator: Department of Employment and Workplace Relations
In February 2005 the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations released Building on Success -
CDEP Discussion Paper 2005 as part of a national consultation process about the broad future directions
for the CDEP program. The paper set out possible improvements to CDEP to help raise the living
standards of Indigenous Australians and provide more non-CDEP jobs, relevant community activities
and business development opportunities. The proposals in the paper gave individuals, organisations and
communities an opportunity to contribute to strengthening CDEP into the future.
The Building on Success CDEP - Future Directions paper summarised the wide-ranging feedback
received from over 2100 people who attended consultation sessions, and through over 100 submissions,
and announced the government's response to the consultation process. The response focused on CDEP
as a stepping stone to improved economic independence.
Review of the Indigenous Education Direct Assistance Program –
Final Report
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Department of Education, Science and Training
Terms of Reference
The Phase 2 Review of the Indigenous Education Direct Assistance (IEDA) program was conducted
between September 2002 and December 2003.
The purpose of this review was to:
Findings
identify ways of improving the appropriateness and effectiveness of the IEDA program
develop a performance framework that will measure educational outcomes of the IEDA
program
review the legal, fraud and audit compliance issues for each policy and program element of
IEDA with the view to developing better outcomes
identify examples of good practice that can be utilised in the delivery of any proposed policy
direction
ascertain timelines and strategies for the implementation of any changes to the IEDA program
in 2004.
Since IEDA commenced in 1991, a main focus has been The Aboriginal Tutorial Assistance Scheme
(ATAS). ATAS provides individual tuition, small group tuition, homework centres and tuition during
school hours. The report suggests early tutorial assistance for Indigenous children will help them
achieve literacy and numeracy benchmarks at years 3 and 5. There has been some improvement, but
there is still a large gap in achievement across reading, writing and numeracy for Indigenous students
compared to all students.
The report provides evidence that ATAS tutoring has contributed to some improvements in literacy and
numeracy in the early years. However, there is no significant national data for literacy and numeracy
outcomes after Year 7. Another program provided under IEDA is the Aboriginal Student Support and
Parent Awareness (ASSPA). The report concluded that although the program had been effective in
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 30
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
increasing the involvement of Indigenous parents in school, there was little evidence that it had been
successful in influencing school decisions and improving educational outcomes.
Some recommendations to improve the appropriateness and effectiveness of the IEDA program
included: the provision of strategic interventions that complement mainstream education programs and
services; strategies to develop and fund more strategic initiatives to improve educational outcomes of
Indigenous students; and to be more innovative and creative in their approach to such initiatives. It was
recommended that a performance reporting framework be developed to assess the impact of IEDA on
student learning outcomes. An overarching evaluation strategy be developed to collect additional
qualitative and quantitative data. Another recommendation was that staff be trained appropriately and
have more focus on learning outcomes as opposed to outputs. In a policy initiative, IEDA should
encourage community capacity building strategies that recognise and build on the strengths of parents,
ATAS tutors and communities. Finally, a risk assessment should be undertaken as part of the
implementation strategy and reassessed each six months.
The Role of Community Development Employment Projects in
Rural and Remote Communities
Year: 2004
Evaluator: National Centre for Vocational Education Research
Website: http://www.ncver.edu.au/vetcontext/publications/1505.html
Terms of Reference
The study aims to describe the role of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP)
scheme in rural and remote communities in Australia and to evaluate the effectiveness of the scheme. It
describes the major needs of such communities (as identified by elected representatives), and how the
schemes have attempted to meet those needs.
Findings
The main performance measures established for the scheme by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Commission (ATSIC) in the 2002/2003 period were met at varying levels of achievement. Training was an
important component of the program and the target of 75% participation reported training had been
provided for participants in a number of diverse sectors.
As at August 2003, there were 35,089 participants in CDEP, of whom 92.7% were Indigenous. Skills
development included on the job training and experience and participants also undertook formal
training. Key outcomes included improved community infrastructure and access to services. Almost 750
activities under taken through the CDEP scheme were related to the provision of municipal services, and
community infrastructure and support. Moreover, this scheme is also a provider of essential services,
especially in remote areas, including local and state and territory government services.
The scheme is also expected to contribute to Indigenous economic development through the
development of commercial activities and the provision of scheme labour to other Indigenous
businesses. For example, in 2002/2003 the scheme included 760 activities involving business
development and assistance, far exceeding its target of 46 such activities that year. However, the
report states that it is difficult to estimate the proportion of participants who move into external work.
The CDEP scheme also enabled over a third of participants to increase their wages by being involved in
contracts with local district councils, or part-time work with other employers.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 31
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The effectiveness of the program is challenged by the identification of suitable projects and the
importance of training for those to have suitable skills and knowledge to help improve their own
economic situation or that of their communities. Whilst the CDEP cannot be expected to solve the
problems of poor initial education it can help in some ways to improve access to education and training
by providing the encouragement and financial support which enable them to engage in and complete
formal qualifications.
Indigenous Employment Policy Evaluation (Stage 2)
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Evaluation and Program Performance Branch (DEEWR)
The evaluation found that the Indigenous Employment Policy (IEP) appeared to be meeting its primary
objective of improving the employment prospects of Indigenous Australians, particularly in the private
sector. Outcomes for Indigenous job seekers increased during the second Job Network contract and
the implementation of Indigenous Employment Centres (IECs) under Australians Working Together had
begun to help participants in Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP) move into open
employment.
About one in ten IEP participants were found to have benefitted from assistance (a strong result by
international standards). Effectiveness seemed higher in regional locations, although participation here
was lower than in urban locations. Together, Intensive Assistance, Wage Assistance, Structured Training
and Employment Projects (STEP) and the Corporate Leaders’ initiative appeared to have been
responsible for between 2400 and 4300 new jobs for Indigenous job seekers per annum, most of these
jobs being in the private sector. However, caution should be exercised in interpretation of the estimates
of additional jobs. Jobs may not be sustained over time, and it was not clear if people had been assisted
more than once or if assistance led to the displacement of other unsubsidised Indigenous workers.
Other benefits of the IEP to job seekers included improving income levels, encouraging independence
from income support and opening-up job opportunities which may not have otherwise been available to
less job-ready job seekers.
The evaluation concluded that to continue to be effective the IEP will need to focus on helping those
Indigenous people who are relatively more highly disadvantaged. Getting and keeping jobs for people
who are less skilled and less job-ready requires considerable commitment and innovation from service
providers, employers and other labour market intermediaries. Program improvements are also needed
in several areas to respond to the significant barriers faced by Indigenous people. Suggested
improvements included:
building on good practice developed by high performing providers, promoting innovation and
proactive forms of support that help retain Indigenous people in jobs
improving recruitment into STEP projects, particularly through IECs and high quality mentoring
programs which improve take-up and retention, and assist employers
encouraging new employers to participate in the IEP and providing a significant level of
guidance to these employers through STEP and the Corporate Leaders initiative
improving the impact of STEP, particularly by encouraging repeat sponsors to assist less skilled
Indigenous job seekers and to sustain and improve their ongoing retention of Indigenous
workers
improving the quality, extent and availability of administrative data which describes STEP
participants, CDEP participation and also underemployed or discouraged Indigenous workers in
ABS collections.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 32
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The evaluation identified a rapidly growing Indigenous population as a major challenge to improving
overall effectiveness of the IEP. This population was projected to grow between 8% and 23% between
2002 and 2006, including a significant inflow of predominantly young people into the labour force. The
continued success of the IEP requires a strong focus on helping younger job seekers.
Indigenous Employment Program Evaluations
Year: 2003-04
An evaluation conducted during 2003-04 found that the policy appeared to be meeting its primary
objective of improving the employment prospects of Indigenous Australians, particularly in the private
sector. Outcomes for Indigenous job seekers increased during the second Job Network contract.
In the 12 months to end October 2006, there were over 11 400 Indigenous Australians placed in
employment and/or training through Indigenous-specific employment programs. These are record
levels.
Evaluation of the National Indigenous English Literacy and
Numeracy Strategy
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Hugh Watson consulting
The National Indigenous English Literacy and Numeracy Strategy (NIELNS) was the subject of an
evaluation during 2002 and 2003. The evaluation team assessed provider reports, talked to key
stakeholders and conducted a series of case studies. The evaluation concluded that 75% of projects,
representing 75% of total funding, had either achieved their targets or made an improvement on their
baseline.
The stated objective of the NIELNS was ‘to achieve English literacy and numeracy for Indigenous
students at levels comparable to those achieved by other young Australians’ (evaluation report page 5).
However, the evaluators accepted the contention that ‘the NIELNS program is more a readiness for
learning program than a literacy and numeracy program. Only strategies under elements 3 (preschool
experiences) and 5 (using best teaching methods) of the 6 elements of the strategy were cited as
having achieved actual literacy and numeracy outcomes ‘in a number of cases’. One element (measuring
accountability) contributed to intermediate outcomes only. Others contributed chiefly or solely to
‘readiness to learn’ outcomes such as improved attendance, and health problems being addressed by
the start of school.
Generally, as would be expected, there were better results for ongoing initiatives with origins predating
NIELNS. Improvements were greatest (94%) in the preschool sector, less (70%) in the school sector and
lowest in the VET sector (just over 40%) which may indicate a priority for early intervention.
The 2003 National Report to Parliament noted:
'The added value of NIELNS can be seen in two ways; through the improving results of projects over
time and through the activities and outcomes that would not have occurred without the program. The
great majority of initiatives were achieving results that contributed to the intended outcomes of
NIELNS'.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 33
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Breaks in the Road – Evaluation of the Indigenous Youth
Partnership Initiative
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Powers and Associates
Terms of Reference
The evaluation team was asked to investigate ‘the contribution of the Indigenous Youth Partnership
Initiative (IYPI) projects to the improvement of Indigenous young people’s literacy and numeracy’ and
‘the contribution of the projects to increasing Indigenous young people’s enterprise and employability
skills’.
Findings
The assessment of IYPI strategies is that career education is an important part of the development of
employability skills. According to the report, the IYPI projects have generally had a beneficial influence
on the literacy, numeracy and employability of their Indigenous participants. Compared with the IYPI
projects servicing metropolitan and regional centres, evaluators observed a number of significant
constraints adversely affecting projects operating in remote communities.
The report considered Vocational Education Programs and coordinating structured work experience. It
stated such programs need to be factored into future initiatives in remote regions. However, it was
realized that over the long term a whole of government approach would further integrate the projects
into the community. The desired approach was described as a ‘holistic, community driven approach that
is well resourced, well coordinated and focuses on the big picture of supporting Indigenous youth
transitions to adulthood and independence’.
The report stated that, ‘in general, the projects were successful in these endeavours’ and have
confirmed the currency of many of the findings of the 1998 Report of the DEETYA Taskforce on School
to Work Transition for Indigenous Australians.
Review of ATAS Bulk Funding Arrangements to Higher Education
and Boarding Schools
Year: 2003
Evaluator: The Indigenous and Transitions Group, Australian Government Department of Education,
Science and Training (DEST)
Terms of Reference
Aboriginal Tutorial Assistance Scheme (ATAS) Bulk Funding Arrangements to Higher Education and
Boarding Schools are funded under the Indigenous Education Direct Assistance program.
The report focused on:
developing a performance framework to move to an outcomes focus, with links to the
Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Program (IESIP);
examining funding levels and formulae allocations;
ascertaining whether the National Office of DEST is best placed to deliver ATAS bulk funding, or
whether it should be devolved to the department's Indigenous Education Unit network; and
identifying examples of best practice which can be used to promote bulk-funded ATAS.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 34
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The review concluded the current performance reporting framework is largely output-focussed.
Generally, no information is provided on the longer term impact of tutoring beyond the final
examination result for the subject which the student received tutoring in. From examining the end of
semester and end of year performance reports provided by institutions, it appears that students who
receive ATAS tutoring do improve their achievement levels for the subjects they are tutored in.
However, it is not possible to determine whether the funds are targeting or reaching those students
most in need. The bulk-funding arrangements recognise that a student’s educational institution is best
placed to determine, monitor and respond to a student’s educational needs. It is nonetheless not
possible to determine if the ATAS tutoring is making a longer term difference by increasing the number
of students who complete award level courses.
The review further concluded that institutions which deliver education into remote locations face
additional costs and diverse circumstances which may make it more difficult to achieve educational
outcomes, and recommended that consideration should be given to moving the funded institutions to a
funding system linked to performance targets. This would allow sufficient flexibility for those
institutions operating in remote locations, while not disadvantaging other institutions.
Review of the Independent Indigenous Vocational Education and
Training Providers
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Department of Education, Science and Training
In November 2002, the Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST) called for a review of four
Independent Indigenous Vocational Education and Training (IIVET) institutes which receive funding
from the department, under the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme (IESIP).The
review examined funding for the independent Indigenous vocational education and training providers,
the services they provide, how service provision might be improved, and compared the outcomes of
this sector with the vocational education and training sector as a whole. The consultants who carried
out the review are not identified.
The review found evidence that Independent Aboriginal VET providers are making a contribution to
Indigenous training in Australia at a time when Indigenous training outcomes still lag behind those of
other Australians. Indigenous-controlled VET providers had literacy and numeracy completion rates of
76.5% and 73% respectively, which were higher than other non - government providers and much higher
than government providers. These results were well above the national average of 56.5% and 54.4%
respectively - and indeed above non-Indigenous rates of 71.6% and 62.9%. Module completion rates were
highest in Indigenous-controlled institutes. However, the review noted that there appears to be little
formal testing of literacy and numeracy at the beginning of courses. This carries a risk of graduates
being restricted in their opportunities because specific needs have not been identified and addressed
before formal coursework begins.
The consultants noted that IIVETS are characterised by some role ambiguity, in that the histories,
cultures and community structures of the IIVETS mean that there are conflicting demands on them to
be both cultural centres and educators in mainstream vocational training. They recommended that a
clear and agreed set of Commonwealth/State guidelines would assist administrators and simplify
accountability and performance planning for IIVETS. This appears to relate to the finding that although
funding is provided through VET programs there is some dissonance between VET measures and
MCEETYA measures for IIVET performance. This can make it difficult for state VET administrators to
reconcile performance expectations and for IIVETS to justify performance to state departments.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 35
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of Indigenous Education Consultative Bodies and
Indigenous Support Units
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Northern Territory University
Terms of Reference
The review was undertaken by Professor Mary Ann Bin-Sallik and Ms Sonia Smallacomb from the Faculty
of Indigenous Research and Education, Northern Territory University. It is the first review of the
structure, operations and funding of seven Indigenous Education Consultative Bodies (IECBs) and three
Indigenous Support Units (ISUs).
The review examined ways in which:
Findings
IECBs and ISUs could be more effective in the provision of policy advice to the Commonwealth
Government
IECBs and ISUs could facilitate more useful consultation with Indigenous communities on key
educational issues
funding could be distributed in a more effective way across IECBs and ISUs
the ISUs could make a greater contribution to improving educational opportunities and
outcomes for Indigenous students.
The review concluded that IECBs and ISUs are important because of their contributions to Indigenous
education. However, the current arrangements and structures do not adequately address the major
education policy issues in the States and Territories, and there is potential for the Commonwealth to
receive far more useful information than is currently provided in response to the funding agreements
with DEST.
The evaluator considered that ‘in general, the Commonwealth is not getting value for money [from
IECBs and ISUs] because there is no advice from the IECBs or ISUs at the Commonwealth level… there
are a number of reasons why this is occurring, one of the main reasons being that there is no formalized
strategy in place for IECBs to meet directly with the Minister [for Education, Science and Training.]’
Indigenous Employment Policy Evaluation (Stage 1)
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Evaluation and Programme Performance Branch (DEWR)
Website: http://www.workplace.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/A97F1122-F519-4DAC-B22E-
127B4A266DC9/0/iepstage1.pdf
Terms of Reference
At the time the Indigenous Employment Policy was announced, the Government made a commitment
to a full evaluation of the Indigenous Employment Programme (IEP). Recognising that it would take
several years for the program to mature, the evaluation strategy adopted a two-stage evaluation
process. This first stage report presents an overall assessment of implementation and early experience
of the IEP and its interaction with the mainstream employment services delivered through Job Network.
A second stage report is expected to focus more closely on performance once policy settings have had
time to mature.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 36
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Progress during the first two years of the IEP was found to have laid solid ground for future
developments. While the first year was affected by implementation and transition issues, the second
year showed encouraging signs of growth in participation and job outcomes. Commencements in the
second year averaged 7 000 per annum, reaching the levels achieved by the previous specialised
Training for Aboriginals Programme (TAP). The flexibility of the IEP together with a clear focus on
employment outcomes, rather than training in isolation, delivered employment opportunities at a lower
cost than under TAP.
Early performance in achieving the policy objectives was promising, but further refinements were
needed. Participation by private sector employers increased and the employment prospects of
Indigenous job seekers appeared to have been improved by participation, though it was too early in the
life of the program to measure its precise impact. Although increasingly pro-active in dealing with this
group, use of Wage Assistance by Job Network appeared low. The evaluation findings point to several
areas which required attention including school-to-work transition, support to keep people in jobs and
wider private sector participation. Ongoing population growth meant it was important to sustain and
build on early progress, particularly given low school retention rates and the geographic dispersion of
the population, which affected access to private sector employment.
Implementation and Management of the Indigenous Employment
Policy
Year: 2003
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2002-2003/Implementation-and-
Management-of-the-Indigenous-Employment-Policy
The Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) audit (No.47 2002–03) of the department's
implementation and management of the Indigenous Employment Policy was tabled in Parliament in
June 2003. It found the department had implemented all elements of the policy in a changing and
challenging environment and that ongoing management was effective. The audit noted the department
had been responsive to emerging Indigenous employment issues and had implemented a number of
enhancements since the policy's introduction to improve take-up and effectiveness.
Audit Report No. 43 2001-02: Indigenous Education Strategies
Year: 2001
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Audit-Reports/2001-2002/Indigenous-Education-
Strategies
Terms of Reference
To improve educational outcomes for Indigenous Australians, two main forms of assistance
administered by the Commonwealth, namely the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Programme
(IESIP) and the Indigenous Education Direct Assistance programs (IEDA), are currently available. The
objective of the audit was to assess whether the department had efficiently and effectively managed
the development and implementation of the IESIP agreements for the 2001 to 2004 quadrennium.
Findings
The department had in place the types of plans that would normally be expected to be used for the
implementation of new IESIP agreements for the 2001 to 2004 quadrennium. However, the timetable
for implementation was not met, with many agreements with major providers being signed some six
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 37
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
months into the 2001 school year. Ultimately, all IESIP agreements were entered into during 2001, with
the final agreement being signed in October 2001.
Evaluation of the Indigenous Small Business Fund (ISBF)
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
The Office of Evaluation and Audit will undertake a study of the ISBF, a part of the Indigenous
Employment Program. The ISBF provides funding to Indigenous community-based organisations for
projects which help create or expand Indigenous businesses and provide jobs for Indigenous people.
Projects may involve developing a business or feasibility plan, exploring business opportunities or
providing business skills training.
The objectives of the evaluation include assessing the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the ISBF
program, identifying the achievements of projects funded under the program, determining the extent
to which project performance and outcomes have met the overall objectives of the ISBF and identifying
any areas where performance can be improved.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 38
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water,
Population and Communities
Caring for Our Country Program
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
An audit would examine the administration of the Caring for Our Country program and whether the
objectives of the program are being met. This audit would involve the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Forestry, and the Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities portfolios.
Working on Country
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Walter Turnbull
Terms of Reference
The purpose of the evaluation:
To assess the appropriateness, efficiency, effectiveness and impact of Working on Country, and
its delivery by funded Indigenous organisations;
To identify achievements of projects funded under the program, and determine the extent to
which project performance and outcomes have met the overall objectives of Working on
Country; and
To identify what elements of Working on Country are working well and should continue, along
with areas where the design or delivery of Working on Country could be improved.
Evaluation methodology
The evaluation of Working on Country involved a desktop examination of background material, briefings
from program staff, review of project documentation, visits to case study sites, consultation with
Indigenous program partners and stakeholders, consultation with relevant academics and Indigenous
and NRM peak bodies, and analysis of issues raised.
Findings
The overall assessment of Working on Country provided by Walter Turnbull was very positive, as stated
below:
‘Overall, Working on Country is a well functioning program and feedback received from participants,
community and other stakeholders in relation to the program was overwhelmingly positive. The
opportunity for Indigenous people undertaking environmental work on their own land has been
recognised as one of, if not the most appropriate means of promoting employment and economic
wellbeing within an Indigenous community. Certainty of ongoing funding availability was cited as
critical to success of the program in achieving environmental as well as social and cultural objectives.
Many of the weaknesses identified during this evaluation are attributable to the rapid escalation in the
scope of the program since its implementation and the challenge in establishing administrative
processes to keep up to date with overarching program requirements such as Caring for our Country. In
particular the monitoring and evaluation framework and the interrelationship between Working on
Country and other programs, such as IPA, could be improved’.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 39
June 2010

Indigenous Heritage Program
Year: 2009
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Indigenous Heritage Program (IHP) provides around $3.5m annually to support projects that
identify, conserve and promote the Indigenous heritage values of places important to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people.
The Office of Evaluation and Audit, Department of Finance and Deregulation, conducted a performance
audit of the IHP in 2009 to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the management of the program
and to determine if the IHP is meeting its objectives.
Findings
The audit concluded that the IHP is supported by well established and sound policies and procedures, is
achieving its stated objectives and is accruing broader social and economic benefits for Indigenous
communities through its activities.
A key recommendation from the audit was that the Department extend the current parameters of the
IHP to enable organisations to undertake longer-term heritage projects by introducing triennial funding
and/or increasing the current funding cap.
In response to the audit, the Department sought Ministerial approval to offer triennial funding for
future funding rounds (commencing 2011-12) to organisations that satisfy certain conditions, including a
proven track record of project delivery.
Indigenous Protected Areas Program
Year: 2008-09
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Website: http://www.deh.gov.au/indigenous/publications/ipa-evaluation.html
An Indigenous Protected Area is an area of land over which the traditional Aboriginal owners have
declared their intent to manage the land for the conservation of biodiversity and cultural values. The
Indigenous Protected Areas (IPA) program links the cultural priorities of Indigenous Australians
together with biodiversity goals of the Government to ensure protected areas are conserved in
accordance with the land management aspirations of Indigenous landowners. The estimated
expenditure for the IPA program in the 2006-07 financial year is $2.9 million.
The goals of the IPA program are to:
establish partnerships between government and Indigenous land managers to support the
development of a comprehensive, adequate and representative national system of protected
areas which is consistent with the international protected areas classification system, by:
assisting Indigenous people to establish and manage protected areas on their estates for which
they hold title
assisting Indigenous Groups and Australian Government agencies at various levels to develop
partnerships and agreements for the cooperative management of existing protected areas
promote Indigenous involvement in protected area management by supporting the
establishment of cooperatively managed protected areas in each jurisdiction, and promotion of
national best practice approaches to cooperative partnerships in protected area management
promote and integrate Indigenous ecological and cultural knowledge into contemporary
protected area management practices in accordance with internationally endorsed protected
areas guidelines.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 40
June 2010

Funding from the IPA program is provided to:
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
assist landowners to consider the implications of establishing an IPA (this could involve holding
community meetings and seeking advice on legal, cultural or conservation aspects to ensure
that informed decisions are made)
develop a management plan for the area which identifies the Indigenous Community's land
management aspirations, potential threats to the values of the land, and management activities
such as weed eradication, feral animal control and cultural heritage conservation activities
declare the land as an IPA
implement the management plan
monitor the effectiveness and outcomes of their land management activities.
In 2006 the Minister for Environment and Heritage (now Sustainability, Environment, Heritage, Water,
Populations and Communities) initiated an evaluation of the Indigenous Protected Area Program. An
extensive consultation process including visits to most states and territories was undertaken in the first
half of 2006. This process also included a call for public submissions, summaries of which have been
incorporated into the review document.
The evaluation considered the extent to which the Program has contributed to meeting Australian
Government policy priorities and the capacity for enhancing these priorities. It also considered the
effectiveness of the Programs delivery of conservation, economic, cultural and social benefits in the
context of sustainable natural resource management at landscape, regional and national scales.
This independent evaluation by the former Director-General of the NSW National Parks and Wildlife
Service, Mr. Brian Gilligan, has hailed the Australian Government's Indigenous Protected Area (IPA)
Programme as the nation's "most successful innovation in Indigenous conservation".
The IPA Program commenced as a pilot in 1995 with the dual aims of supporting Indigenous land
management and achieving national conservation objectives. Today the IPA Program supports 22
declared IPAs covering a total of 14.9 million hectares in every state and territory of Australia (with the
exception of the ACT).
This independent review recognizes the value of the Australian government's $14.8 million dollar
investment in this program and has found that:
It contributes significantly to the National Reserve System and has been extremely cost
effective in contributing to national conservation goals
Provides meaningful work opportunities for Indigenous Australians
Operates robust monitoring and evaluation systems.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 41
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The review also found that in addition to important biodiversity and conservation outcomes,
communities involved in the IPA Program report significant additional benefits. In particular it confirms
that IPAs create proven pathways to meaningful jobs looking after land and a framework for skills
development.
95% of IPA communities report economic participation and development benefits from
involvement with the Program;
60% of communities report positive outcomes for early childhood development from their IPA
activities;
85% report that IPA activities improve early school engagement;
74% report that their IPA management activities make a positive contribution to the reduction of
substance abuse; and
74% of IPA communities report that their participation in IPA work contributes to more
functional families by restoring relationships and reinforcing family and community structures.
Bushlight Program
Year: 2007-08
The Bushlight Program aims to improve the livelihood choices of targeted remote Indigenous
communities in Western Australia, Northern Territory, Queensland and South Australia. This will be
achieved through increasing access to sustainable (that is, affordable, consistent and reliable)
renewable energy services.
Bushlight is a project of the Centre for Appropriate Technology Inc. (CAT) in Alice Springs, with staff
based in Alice Springs, Cairns, Derby and Darwin. Bushlight is funded by Australian Greenhouse Office
(AGO) of the Department of Environment and Heritage and the Department of Families, Community
Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaCSIA).
Bushlight’s objectives are to:
Improve the reliability of renewable energy systems in remote Indigenous communities
Improve the capacity and confidence of communities to choose and manage renewable energy
services
Establish a technical service network to service and maintain renewable energy services in
remote communities.
Bushlight commenced in 2002, originally as a 4 year project and by mid 2006 had installed over 90
renewable energy systems, providing very reliable 24 hour power to over 2,000 people living in remote
communities in Australia. On the basis of these achievements, the Australian government extended
Bushlight for a further two years to June 2008.
Indigenous Engagement in Natural Resource Management
Year: 2007
The Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) was established by the Australian Government in 1997 to help restore
and conserve Australia's environment and natural resources.
The Enhancing Indigenous Engagement in NRM program funded under the national component of the
NHT has a focus on three broad areas of concern to maximising Indigenous engagement in the NRM
process. These are:
achieving representation: relates to matters such as leadership, governance, scale of Regions,
time constraints and time demands
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 42
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
awareness and attitude change: addresses factors such as education (two-way), recognition,
and understanding of the cultural - natural resources link
influencing NRM plans and investment strategies: includes the development of plans and
strategies that encompass social, economic and cultural values and outcomes for Indigenous
peoples.
NHT Ministerial Board endorsed the inclusion of a 7th objective for the Natural Heritage Trust in March
2005:
Promote Indigenous community participation in planning and delivery of Regional Natural
Resource Management outcomes.
Bushlight Evaluation
Year: 2005
Evaluator: IT Power (Australia)
Website: http://www.icat.org.au/media/Research/energy/BL-evaluationreport-2005.pdf
Findings
Bushlight has established an effective organisation delivering high quality, rigorously tested
renewable energy systems to small remote Indigenous communities
The organisation has attracted and largely retained dedication, professional staff at all levels
and is underpinned by excellent management and management systems
Bushlight has established and is sustaining real engagement with beneficiary communities and
other relevant stakeholders
An excellent community energy planning process has been designed, supported by a wealth of
simply presented, understandable information resources
Communities have access to an integrated network comprising homelands support agencies,
renewable energy service providers and Bushlight Technical Support to provide service and
maintenance of the renewable energy systems
Arrangements are being established for communities to make financial contributions to the
costs of ongoing service and maintenance and towards major component replacements. This is
expected to assist long-term, reliable system operations, though this may be difficult to
guarantee should Bushlight be discontinued
Users and other key stakeholders have received extensive training on systems operations and
basic systems maintenance
Recipient communities visited are universally very satisfied with both the performance of their
systems and the relationship with the Bushlight organisation
Bushlight is supporting Industry development, particularly in the context of upholding quality
energy services provision, helping to expand the number of renewable energy installation and
service professionals, and contributing towards development of robust remote area power
supply components and systems
Bushlight’s linkage to CAT has instilled some excellent community service and livelihood values,
which have placed energy services provision alongside broader community development
objectives
The costs of this service delivery are presently marginally higher than the commercial sector,
though not exceptionally so compared to the range of commercial project costs encountered.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 43
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The additional costs appear fully justified given the likely improvements in service availability,
and reliability. These costs are showing a downward trend
There is still ample need and opportunity to extend such services to other Indigenous
communities
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 44
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Office for the Arts (Department of the Prime Minister
and Cabinet)
Review of the Australian Government's investment into the
Indigenous Broadcasting and Media Sector
Year: 2010
Website: http://www.arts.gov.au/indigenous/broadcasting/review
As part of the 2010-11 Budget the Government announced that it would undertake an independent
review of the Government’s investment in the Indigenous Broadcasting and Media Sector. Mr Neville
Stevens AO is leading the review and is supported by an expert panel comprising Mr Laurie Patton and
Ms Kerrynne Liddle.
The review is considering whether the resources allocated to the sector are delivering the best
outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people across the country in the most efficient way.
The review will also provide the Government with information to assist in future policy considerations
of free-to-air carriage of Indigenous television and radio content and will take into account the changes
taking place in the delivery of broadcast media, such as the switch to digital-only television and the
introduction of the broadband network.
The review is expected to be finalised in December 2010.
Indigenous Broadcasting Policy
Year: 2006-07
Evaluator: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. The program is now
administered by the Office for the Arts, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Terms of Reference
The 2006-07 review of the Indigenous Broadcasting Program (IBP) examined funding practices in order
to better reflect the needs, priorities and aspirations of Indigenous communities; and proposed a set of
principles for the future governance of the program.
It included an examination of:
funding models for broadcasting services
operating models for remote Indigenous media organisations
funding for capital equipment
employment and training
Indigenous broadcasting peak bodies
the National Indigenous radio service
Indigenous television
shared responsibility agreements, and
digital services.
In May 2007 the Report on the review of the IBP was released. The report summarised the issues
identified in the discussion paper and the consultation process, along with the proposed way forward in
relation to each.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 45
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
National Arts and Crafts Industry Support
Year: 2008-09
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) in consultation with the Department of
Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. The program is now administered by the Office for the Arts,
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Terms of Reference
The evaluation assessed:
the effectiveness of the NACIS program in building stronger arts centres
the effectiveness of the NACIS program in building a more sustainable Indigenous visual arts
industry
the efficiency with which the outputs and outcomes of the NACIS program are achieved
the effectiveness of the NACIS program in addressing the key result areas of the Indigenous
Arts Centres Strategy and Action Plan.
The evaluation focused on
Findings
the appropriateness of the program’s objectives and activities given the current policy context
and whole of government arrangements for Indigenous affairs and
the impact of the NACIS program on the sustainable functioning of art centres and the
development of the Indigenous visual arts industry.
The evaluation was primarily undertaken in 2007 but the final report not presented to the Department
until June 2009. The report made recommendations in relation to the development of a clearer program
logic, review of performance measures and increased resourcing for capacity building in the sector.
The Department accepted the recommendations with qualification, noting the significant additional
investment and program improvements arising from implementation of election commitments and
progress on whole of government program delivery.
Maintenance of Indigenous Language and Records Program
Year: 2006-07
Evaluator: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. The program is now
administered by the Office for the Arts, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Terms of Reference
The review of the Maintenance of Indigenous Languages and Records (MILR) Program is to evaluate
the effectiveness, appropriateness and efficiency of the program. The broad objective of MILR is to
support the revival and maintenance of Indigenous languages as living systems of knowledge shared by
communities and passed down from generation to generation. The review currently consists of three
elements:
To investigate the appropriateness, efficiency and effectiveness of resource allocation in the
MILR Program.
To explore options for MILR Program improvement including reference to the continued
relevance and priority of Program objectives in light of current circumstances and changes in
Government policy
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 46
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
To assess the degree and extent of MILR Program accountability in the context of best practice
grant administration.
Findings
The MILR evaluation investigated, reported and made recommendations on:
whether or not the program is achieving its objectives in the most efficient and effective way;
and
the scope for improving the performance of the program.
Indigenous Culture Support Program (previously known as the
Regional Arts and Culture Support Program)
Year: 2005-06
Evaluator: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts. This program’s
current name is the Indigenous Culture Support Program and is now administered by the Office for the
Arts, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
Terms of Reference
The evaluation examined the match between outcomes and program objectives. The results of the
evaluation have been the basis for program improvement for the 2006-07 funding round and review of
program guidelines exercise.
Findings
The Regional Arts and Culture Support evaluation investigated, reported and made recommendations
on:
whether or not the program is achieving its objectives in the most efficient and effective way
the scope for improving the performance of the program.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 47
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Office for Sport (Department of Prime Minister and
Cabinet)
Indigenous Sport and Recreation Program (ISRP)
Year: 2009-2010
Evaluator: Department of Health and Ageing
In 2009-10, a working group (Indigenous Sport and Active Recreation Working Group) was established
to make recommendations to the Sport and Recreation Ministers Council (SRMC) on the future
coordination and delivery of sporting and active recreation opportunities for Indigenous Australians.
The objective of the Working Group is to achieve better alignment and coordination across all levels of
government with regard to funding and outcomes for Indigenous sport programs. A model for the
format that this objective may take is currently being tested and trialled by the Working Group with a
small number of jurisdictions (Northern Territory and Western Australia – and in selected Remote
Service Delivery sites).
The Working Group comprises representatives from the Australian Sports Commission (ASC),
Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA), and state/territory representatives from Victoria, South
Australia, Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland.
The report will be presented to the Standing Committee on Recreation and Sport (SCORS) in first half of
the 2010-11 financial year with the final report to be presented to SRMC before the end of 2010.
Indigenous Sport and Recreation Program (ISRP)
Year: 2005-06
Evaluator: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts
Findings
In 2005–06, an internal review of the program indicated strong stakeholder support for ISRP initiatives
including the employment of Indigenous Sport Development Officers (ISDOs) which work with
Indigenous communities and relevant government agencies to promote sport and physical
recreation activity at the regional and local level. However, the review found that some improvements
could be made. In particular, the 2006-07 guidelines for the annual submission base funding have been
amended to reflect a stronger focus on family and services to Indigenous people. Greater stability of
funding for the employment of ISDOs is also being provided by entering into multi-year agreements.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 48
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA)
Evaluation of the 2010 Budget measure – Expanding the supply
of Opal fuel
Year: 2013-14
Evaluator: TBD
Terms of Reference
In mid 2013-14, an evaluation of the 2010 Budget measure – Expanding the supply of Opal fuel will be
undertaken to assess the effectiveness of the expanded voluntary roll out of Opal fuel to northern
Australia. The findings of the evaluation will be used by the Australian Government to inform an
evidence-based decision regarding the future directions for the program and the value of an additional
legislative approach to support the supply of Opal fuel once the full voluntary roll out of Opal fuel has
occurred in 2012-13.
Indigenous Mobile Dental Program [Mobile Dental Services Pilot
for Rural and Regional Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Communities]
Year: 2012-13
Evaluator: TBD
Terms of Reference
The Department is developing a series of projects to implement and test models of dental service
delivery to Indigenous populations in rural and regional areas of Australia. It is expected that these
projects will be largely reliant on the use of transportable equipment and/or mobile staff.
The evaluation will be a major component of the project, and will help guide the development of future
Commonwealth policy in this area.
Accordingly, the design of projects will take account of the need to collect data to support the
evaluation.
These projects will be evaluated in the latter part of 2012-13 in terms of:
effectiveness (in facilitating service access and improving oral health)
cost-effectiveness
sustainability
applicability of the project to other locations using data on services provided, and people
treated, collected in the course of the project.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 49
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Indigenous Chronic Disease Package
Year: 2012
Evaluator: TBD
On 29 November 2008, the Commonwealth announced $805.5 million over four years for an Indigenous
Chronic Disease Package as its contribution to the National Partnership Agreement on Closing the Gap
in Indigenous Health Outcomes. This major investment aims to work towards closing the gap in life
expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians within a generation.
The Package will reduce chronic disease risk factors; encourage earlier detection and better
management of chronic disease in primary health care services; improve follow up care; and increase
the capacity of the primary care workforce to deliver effective health care to Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples across Australia.
A monitoring and evaluation framework for the Package has been developed. The framework will serve
as a plan to guide the Package’s monitoring activity and the overall evaluation and will facilitate an
assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and appropriateness of the Package in achieving its key
goals. The Framework has been published on DoHA’s website, and is available at:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/ctg/publishing.nsf/Content/ICDP-monitoring-and-evaluationframework.
The overall evaluation of the Package will be undertaken in 2012. The evaluation will build the evidence
base to inform future policy development and program implementation in regard to closing the gap in
life expectancy. The Terms of Reference for the evaluation will be developed closer to the time.
National Indigenous Health Workforce Training Package
Year: 2011
Evaluator: TBD
In March 2008 the Government announced $19 million over three years to implement a package of
measures under a National Indigenous Health Workforce Training Package to address the following
goals:
high quality Indigenous student and workforce support;
a culturally safe learning environment; and
workforce reform through joint health and education collaboration.
An evaluation of the elements of the Package will be undertaken during the first half of 2011.
Draft Terms of Reference
Provide the Department of Health and Ageing with advice on the contribution made by the
elements of the Training Package in achieving;
o
o
the support and strengthening of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health
workforce; and
attracting more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to take up careers as health
professionals.
Provide the Department of Health and Ageing with advice on future priorities funded by the
Health Workforce Division and whether the current Training Package meets those future
priorities and provide suggestions on alternative models;
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 50
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Provide the Department of Health and Ageing with advice as to whether the three year funding
for the Training Package has:
o
o
improved Indigenous health workforce capacity; and
whether this has been effective and is sustainable.
Provide advice to the Department of Health and Ageing on possible effective and measurable
Key Performance Indicators that could be incorporated into possible future Indigenous Health
Workforce program management arrangements.
Indigenous Early Childhood Development (IECD) National
Partnership (NP) Agreement
Year: 2010-11
On 2 October 2008, as part of its commitment to Closing the Gap in Indigenous health outcomes, the
Council of Australian Governments (COAG) signed the Indigenous Early Childhood Development
National Partnership (IECD NP) agreement to improve the health and development of Indigenous
children in their early years. The IECD NP was revised to incorporate amended reporting and
governance arrangements. These amendments were agreed by COAG on 2 July 2009.
The IECD NP seeks to implement measures that will assist in meeting three COAG targets:
halve the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five within a decade
halve the gap for Indigenous students in reading, writing and numeracy within a decade
to ensure all Indigenous four years olds in remote communities have access to early childhood
education within five years.
Through this Agreement, the Commonwealth and the States and Territories will work together to
improve the early childhood outcomes of Indigenous children by addressing the high levels of
disadvantage they currently experience to give them the best start in life.
The IECD NP Agreement comprises $564 million of joint funding over six years with the Commonwealth
providing the majority of the funding. The IECD NP consists of three Elements:
Element One: $292 million over six years for the Integration of Early Childhood Services through
the establishment of at least 35 Children and Family Centres (managed by DEEWR)
Element Two: $107 million over 5 years for Increased Access to Antenatal Care, Pre-pregnancy
and Teenage Sexual and Reproductive Health (managed by DoHA)
Element Three: Commonwealth contribution of $90.3 million over 5 years through the New
Directions Mothers and Babies Services program, complemented by an additional $75 million
contribution from jurisdictions to Increase Access to, and use of, Maternal and Child Health
Services by Indigenous Families (managed by DoHA)
This Agreement’s effectiveness in achieving its outcomes will be determined through a comprehensive
national evaluation to be undertaken throughout the life of the Agreement. An evaluation strategy will
be designed in light of the reporting requirements in the IECD NP. A set of technical data specifications
will be developed to define the exact measures to be collected to support the on-going monitoring and
evaluation of the IECD NP.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 51
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The States and Territories will develop Implementation Plans (IPs) setting out activities that address
local needs aligning with the objectives specified in the Agreement. The Commonwealth, states and
territories will work in partnership to evaluate outcomes of the Agreement at a national and local level
and provide sufficient data as specified in IPs to enable a thorough evaluation of outcomes of the
Agreement at a national and local level.
The evaluation strategy is being developed and the evaluation will commence later in 2011. It will
provide the framework for the final report to COAG in June 2014.
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Mobile Outreach Service
(MOS) and the Northern Territory Mobile Outreach Service Plus
(MOS Plus)
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: Success Works Pty Ltd
The Northern Territory Sexual Assault Mobile Outreach Service (MOS) commenced in 2008-09 as part of
a Government Election Commitment to expand sexual assault counselling in remote areas of the
Northern Territory. In 2009-10 the MOS was expanded in both size and scope to deliver a range of
services connected to any form of child abuse related trauma, including sexual assault. This initiative is
known as the NT Mobile Outreach Service Plus (MOS Plus).
The MOS Plus service provides culturally safe child abuse counselling and support services to Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander children, families and communities in remote Northern Territory communities
and town camps.
The Department engaged Success Works Pty Ltd on 30 June 2010 through an open tender process to
undertake an evaluation of the MOS and MOS Plus services. The overall objective of the evaluation is to
assess the implementation of services and the impact on, and outcomes for, the target population. The
evaluation will address the extent to which services have been:
Effective in meeting intended outcomes;
Efficient in expending resources on the intended services; and
Appropriate to the needs of the children, families and communities.
The evaluation has been designed to include both summative and formative elements, to document
lessons learned and to make recommendations that may be used for consideration for future policy and
planning.
The evaluation is being conducted throughout the 2010-11 financial year, with a final report due to the
Department of Health and Ageing on 31 July 2011.
Performance Audit of Residential Aged Care for Indigenous
Australians
Year: 2009-10
Auditor: Office of Evaluation & Audit (OEA)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Indigenous-Program-Reports/2009-2010/Performance-
Audit-of-Residential-Aged-Care-for-Indigenous-Australians
Terms of Reference
assess the overall efficiency and effectiveness of residential aged care services provided to older
Indigenous Australians which have been funded by the Australian Government’s Flexible
Program
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 52
June 2010

Key Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
assess how the Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) assure itself that residential aged care
services funded under the Aged Care Act 1997 (Aged Care Act), where Indigenous residents
make up more than 20 per cent of total residents at an aged care facility, deliver appropriate
services.
Flexible Program
Overall, the audit considers the provision of aged care services that have the flexibility to adapt to the
varied needs of elderly Indigenous people in rural and remote communities meets a valuable need. The
cashed out funding model along with other viability supplements and the flexibility afforded to
individual services is an important element of this flexibility. Recent initiatives will also improve the
focus on quality standards, capital replacement as well as monitoring and reporting arrangements.
OEA found that program documentation to guide the operation of the program was very limited and
DoHA found it difficult to provide key documents against which OEA could assess the program’s
progress and development. In addition, no guidelines were developed until 2006, 13 years after the
program had commenced. Formal guidelines have now been approved and will be applied to the 2009–
10 funding agreements. OEA considers the lack of formal and authoritative program documentation to
be an important management weakness requiring early attention. Furthermore, there appears to have
been limited assessment made of the program since its commencement, despite undertakings by DoHA
to implement regular evaluations. Given the increase in the numbers of older Indigenous Australians, it
would be timely for DoHA to formally review the level and location of need and how this aligns with the
current distribution of services. This would allow the Department to take a more strategic approach to
the management of the Flexible Program.
Mainstream Program
The audit found that the Mainstream Program seeks to meet the needs of Indigenous Australians by
funding a number of Indigenous aged care services and by using the population of Indigenous
Australians aged over 50 when determining the aged care places allocated to regions (rather than the
over 70 year age applied to mainstream Australia). However, Indigenous Australians aged 50–69 are not
counted in the national planning process, creating a gap in the overall number of places allocated. A
shortfall in the number of places funded may also arise if Service Providers do not bid to provide aged
care places in some regions.
There are no Indigenous-specific standards for ensuring the provision of appropriate aged care services,
however the Accreditation Standards do have a more general Cultural and Spiritual Life outcome which
includes the consideration of an Indigenous client’s culture. It was also found that Aged Care
Assessment Teams that assess an individual’s eligibility for aged care services are seen as intrusive by
some Indigenous Australians and this may result in a lower uptake of mainstream aged care services.
The Evaluation of the Northern Territory (NT) Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Community Aged Care Workforce
Development Initiatives
Year: 2008-10
Evaluator: Gevers Goddard Jones (GGJ)
The Department of Health and Ageing has engaged consultants Gevers Goddard Jones (GGJ) to conduct
an evaluation of the implementation of the NT community aged care workforce development initiatives.
Terms of Reference
GGJ will provide the Department with an evaluation of the implementation of the community aged care
workforce development initiatives under the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) Welfare
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 53
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Reform Measure, including examining the appropriateness and effectiveness of these initiatives in
achieving the desired workforce development.
The aims of these initiatives are:
To build the capacity and sustainability of the Indigenous community aged care workforce in the
NT
To improve the quality of community aged care services to Indigenous people in the NT through
workforce development
The following workforce development initiatives are within scope of this evaluation:
Conversion of CDEP placements to paid employment in community aged care services across
the Northern Territory (NT) and the resultant workforce implications
NT Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Aged Care Training Resources Project
NT Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Community Aged Care Workforce Training Project
The process undertaken by the Department to establish and support the individual initiatives
The partnership approach taken by the Department
The information produced and disseminated as part of these initiatives
Whether the Projects as a whole, have had a positive impact on the aged care workforce
This evaluation has now concluded. The final evaluation report includes an executive summary as well
as a comprehensive evaluation of the overall workforce development strategy.
Healthy for Life Program Evaluation
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Urbis Pty. Ltd.
Website
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/h4l/publishing.nsf/Content/21D7AED124027F5DCA2571950002F31E/$F
ile/HFL%20-%20Evaluation.pdf
The Healthy for Life (HFL) Program was developed in 2005/2006 to improve the capacity and
performance of Indigenous primary health care services to deliver high quality maternal and child health
services and chronic disease care through population health approaches, using a Continuous Quality
Improvement (CQI) process.
Terms of Reference
In January 2009, the Office for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health (OATSIH) commissioned
Urbis to undertake an evaluation of HFL, focusing on:
the extent to which the Program has been implemented as planned
what has worked and what has not worked, and why
the level of participant and stakeholder experience and satisfaction with the Program
Program reach and outputs
the degree to which short-term Program achievements are being met and progress is being
made towards longer-term outcomes.
The evaluation methodology included:
consultation with all HFL sites funded in the first two funding Rounds (including 15 field visits)
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 54
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
consultation with six services that would be eligible for HFL but have not participated
consultation with 25 key stakeholders in the sector
a general invitation for people and organisations to submit written comments
a review of Program documentation, including data on service activity and Essential Indicators.
The evaluators found that the range of service improvements prompted or enabled by HFL includes:
improved physical access to care – including through transport services and visiting community
members in their homes, in hospitals and in schools
new approaches to care delivery – including targeted clinics (e.g. diabetes clinics), peer support
programs and other initiatives that support healthy living
new approaches to care planning and coordination – including new or restructured program
areas, individualised care planning, internal coordination activities and improved relationships
with other agencies
development and improvement of information systems – including through electronic Patient
Information and Recall Systems (PIRS) and ongoing use of CQI tools
development and improvement of resources – including templates, checklists, health promotion
resources and other resources, as well as purchasing of equipment
education and health promotion – including in schools, through community events, in clinics and
through local media
staffing measures – including recruitment, retention and reallocation of health workers,
management staff and data system administrators
training and capacity-building – including achieving cultural change in the way that service
activity and client outcome data are understood and used.
Quality improvement and service reform is a major undertaking, particularly when conducted in
partnership with other services. In this context, these service improvements should be seen as
significant achievements.
Regarding progress towards program outcomes, the evaluators conclude that significant gains have
been made over the life of the Program in the quality of data being collected and reported by HFL
services. This is one of the main achievements of the Program to date, and enables services to use their
own data for ongoing CQI at the service level.
There are promising signs with a number of the short-to-medium term health outcomes. A total of 42
recommendations were made.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 55
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of Primary Health Care Funding
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Price Waterhouse Cooper on behalf of Office of Evaluation and Audit-Indigenous Programs
(OEA-IP)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/Publications/Indigenous-Program-Reports/2009-2010/Evaluation-of-
Primary-Health-Care-Funding-to-Aboriginal-and-Torres-Strait-Islander-Health-Services
Terms of Reference
The evaluation of the Primary Health Care Funding administered by the Office for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Health (OATSIH) was part of OEA-IP’s Work Plan for 2007-2010. The objective was to
assess the efficiency and effectiveness of:
the Department’s management of primary health care funding as provided to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Health Services (ATSIHSs);
program service delivery by ATSIHSs in improving access to effective primary health care
services for Indigenous Australians; and
the Department’s processes for assessing how its primary health care funding influences health
outcomes for Indigenous Australians.
The evaluation followed on from the 2004 review of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary
Health Care Program.
Findings
The results of the evaluation demonstrated improvement from the 2004 evaluation particularly the
evolution of OATSIH as a more efficient and effective organisation not only at the operational/process
level but also realising heightened strategic and policy direction.
The primary health care workforce employed by Services, including the Indigenous health workforce
has been steadily increasing; with a 32 per cent increase in administrative staff employed, and a 29 per
cent increase in the number of health staff employed. Since 2003-04, there has also been a 24 per cent
increase in the numbers of Indigenous health workers employed by the Services.
There has been an overall upward trend in the number of episodes of care delivered by the Services
from 2003-04 to 2006-07, with a two per cent increase in the number of episodes of care delivered. In
relation to the number of individual clients seen by these Services however, the trend differs somewhat,
with numbers in 2005–06 dropping slightly in comparison to the previous two years, and subsequently
increasing again in 2006–07. Despite this drop in the number of clients seen, the numbers of episodes of
care being provided is increasing.
The evaluation identified Project Officers in State and Territory offices as the key to enhancing
opportunities to improve communication and relationships between OATSIH and the Services.
In relation to determination of primary health care service priorities, program design and funding
allocation processes, it was noted that OATSIH has in place a consultation strategy that engages with
the sector across national, jurisdictional and regional levels through a variety of groups and forums.
Perceptions on the Risk Assessment Process (RAP) were also examined as part of this evaluation. The
RAP provides a mechanism to identify and treat symptoms of risk in funded organisations. It was
commonly reported that the RAP had been useful and assisted the Services to identify organisational
risks but that the process was intensive. The process is currently under review to identify further
opportunities for improvement including developing a standard set of communication and guidelines
for dissemination to all funded organisations regarding the RAP.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 56
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Northern Territory Emergency Response Child
Health Check Initiative (CHCI) and the Expanding Health Services
Delivery Initiative (EHSDI)
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Allen and Clarke Policy and Regulatory Specialists Ltd (Allen and Clarke)
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/Health-oatsih-nter-eval-chci
In June 2007, the Northern Territory Emergency Response, or NTER, was implemented in response to
the report of the Northern Territory Board of Inquiry into the Protection of Aboriginal Children from
Sexual Abuse, commonly known as the Little Children are Sacred report. The NTER comprises a range of
initiatives, of which the Child Health Check Initiative (CHCI) and the Expanding Health Services Delivery
Initiative (EHSDI) are part.
The CHCI rolled out from July 2007, providing health checks and follow-up services for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children less than 16 years of age, living in the remote communities covered by the
NTER. The program was due to be completed by 30 June 2009, however hearing and ear, nose and
throat (ENT) follow-up services are now being provided for one additional year and dental follow-up
services are continuing for another three years.
EHSDI officially began on 1 July 2008, and is currently funded until 2011-12. It aims to expand health
services and support sustainable improvements in the delivery of health services and includes a number
of key reform components.
The evaluation commenced in June 2009 and will assess the performance of these initiatives in relation
to their appropriateness, effectiveness and efficiency and contribute to the refinement of policy and
practice.
The evaluation of the CHCI will be summative, and will focus on the impacts of the Child Health Checks
(CHCs) in terms of coverage, diagnosis of health conditions, effectiveness of follow-up services, and
impacts on service delivery, health status and treatment. The evaluation will consider implementation
issues, such as how the health checks were run in different communities, and what else was happening
in these communities (before and during the implementation of CHCs).
The focus of the EHSDI evaluation is formative and will report on whether the program is on track to
expand primary care service delivery, improve service delivery structures and processes, meet the
health needs of the Indigenous population, improve health outcomes and make the best use of scarce
resources. It will be informed by data collected against the NT Aboriginal Health Key Performance
Indicators (NT AHKPIs), other available administrative data (e.g. hospital and registry data), and several
case studies.
Further detail regarding the evaluation objectives and questions, data sources and methods are
described in the Evaluation Design Report, available at the internet addresses listed above.
The expected timeframe for finalisation of the evaluation report is early 2011.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 57
June 2010

Evaluation of the Impact of Opal fuel
Year: 2008
Evaluator: Peter d’Abbs and Gillian Shaw
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/1D4DE3E4B7434007CA257590001BB28
A/$File/Executive%20Summary%20of%20the%20Evaluation%20of%20the%20Impact%20of%20Opal%20Fuel.p
df
Terms of reference
Measure the prevalence of petrol sniffing in selected communities
Determine the impact that Opal fuel had on the prevalence of petrol sniffing and other
outcomes in selected communities
Identify and briefly describe other factors that have contributed to the prevalence of petrol
sniffing and other outcomes e.g. youth diversionary activities, night patrols, consistent
legislation across jurisdictions, community leadership and community driven initiatives etc
Identify and measure (where possible) any unintended consequences of the rollout of Opal fuel,
for example geographical displacement, substance substitution, trafficking of petrol into
communities
Develop conclusions and make recommendations based on the findings of the impact
evaluation.
This study follows on from a baseline study conducted by the same authors between 2005 and 2006. In
the baseline study 74 communities from all over remote Australia that were currently using, or shortly
to begin using Opal fuel, were surveyed to establish an accurate count of the prevalence and frequency
of petrol sniffing. This impact study re-visited 20 of the initial 74 sites and once again gathered
prevalence and frequency data. In addition qualitative data was gathered on youth programs, and other
factors that may have influenced sniffing levels.
Findings
This study allows the Department of Health and Ageing to make a number of clear statements about
the change in levels of sniffing in the communities in the sample:
the prevalence of sniffing has declined in 17 out of the 20 of communities in the study
across the whole sample there has been a decrease of 431 (70%) in the number of people
sniffing between baseline and follow up
Central Australia and the APY Lands are the regions with the largest decreases in prevalence of
sniffing, with 94% and 93% decreases respectively
the number of people sniffing has dropped substantially across all frequency groups, with a fall
of 60% in the number of people sniffing at occasional levels, of 85% at regular light levels, and of
90% at regular heavy levels
the substantial drop in the number of people sniffing at regular heavy levels indicates a
comparable substantial decrease in the negative social impact caused by sniffing in communities
in the sample, this is supported by qualitative feedback
there is a statistically significant relationship between the distance from each community to the
nearest ULP outlet, and the size of the decrease in the prevalence of sniffing at each
community, which indicates that the use of Opal fuel has had a significant role in the decrease in
the prevalence of sniffing
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 58
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
qualitative feedback indicates that most residents of the communities who have experienced a
decline in sniffing attribute the cause of that decline, at least in part, to the introduction of Opal
fuel.
These conclusions point to a positive change in the number of people sniffing, and the frequency with
which they sniff in most communities in the sample. This change cannot be solely attributed to the use
of Opal fuel, as two communities who have experienced no change in the availability of petrol also
recorded decreases in prevalence between baseline and follow up. However, as noted, many residents
of the sample communities believed that Opal fuel had played a significant role in the reduction of
sniffing in their community.
An Executive Summary of the report “Evaluation of the Impact of Opal Fuel” written by Peter d’Abbs
(James Cook University) and Gillian Shaw (Bowchung Pty Ltd) for the Commonwealth Department of
Health and Ageing is available on line. The full evaluation report has not been publicly released due to
the sensitive nature of data relating to petrol sniffing and to maintain the privacy of individual
communities.
Review of the Alcohol and Other Drug Service Components of the
Northern Territory Emergency Response
Year: 2008
Evaluator: Origin Consulting and Bowchung Consulting
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-oatsih-closinggapreviewalcohol-drug
The Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER) included legislation which banned the possession,
sale, transportation and consumption of alcohol in prescribed areas, including remote Indigenous
communities in the Northern Territory (NT) from September 2007. The aim of the NTER Alcohol and
Other Drugs (AOD) Response Measure was to ensure that appropriate AOD related health and
substance use services were in place to support individuals and communities affected by the new
alcohol legislation. The response included the provision of two dedicated hospital beds at both
Katherine District and Tennant Creek hospitals, the rapid deployment of specialist AOD teams to
support these beds for an initial six weeks, funding to enhance the capacity of residential rehabilitation
services in all regional centres, and the creation of 28 AOD outreach worker positions consisting of AOD
registered nurses and Indigenous community support workers.
The Department commissioned Origin Consulting and Bowchung Consulting in August 2008. The
overall evaluation objective is to assess how well the Measure has been implemented and the extent to
which it has achieved its goals. In order to answer the overall evaluation objective, the Consultants are
to:
assess the extent to which appropriate Alcohol and Other Drugs (AOD) related health and
substance use services were put in place in the Northern Territory (NT) to support individuals
and communities affected by the new Commonwealth alcohol legislation
assess the extent to which innovative opportunities were created to reduce harmful drinking
levels among individuals and communities affected by the new Commonwealth alcohol
legislation in the NT, through the introduction of Measures under the NTER AOD Response
Measure.
The evaluation report was received in June 2010 and is available on the Department’s website.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 59
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Mid-Term Evaluation of the Quality Assurance for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Medical Services (QAAMS) Program
Year: 2008
Evaluator: Campbell Research & Consulting
The Australian Government has funded a pathology program since 1999 called the Quality Assurance in
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Medical Services (QAAMS) program, which provides training,
support, and on-going education for health care workers and a national quality assurance program at
Aboriginal Medical Services across Australia where diabetes-related pathology testing is being
undertaken on site using point of care testing (POCT) devices.
The aim of this program is to support the better management of diabetes in Indigenous communities,
80% of which are in rural and remote locations, by providing diabetes-related pathology testing
followed by appropriate treatment to indigenous diabetic patients on site to avoid the poor health
outcomes that are associated with unmanaged diabetes in a population where diabetes is diagnosed at
an estimated rate of 3.4 times that in the general population.
In September 2008, Campbell Research and Consulting was commissioned by the Department of Health
and Ageing to review the 2005 - 09 QAAMS program where the findings would assist in the
development of the next QAAMS program for 2009-13.
Terms of Reference
The purpose of this review was to examine the appropriateness, effectiveness, sustainability and
transferability of the QAAMS model used in the provision of HbA1c and urine ACR testing for the
management of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients.
The significant components of the review consisted of:
Findings
An examination of current practice in the fields of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health,
diabetes management and POCT
Consultation with key stakeholders including QAAMS participants and other relevant
stakeholders (eg. Diabetes/Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers)
An examination of the quality and effectiveness of the POCT services undertaken in the program
Examination of the health outcome data from the program.
The key findings from this review are as follows:
The QAAMS program was shown to be meeting best practice standards in the areas of Indigenous
health care, diabetes management and POCT.
The standards of quality of testing among Aboriginal Health Services are comparable to that of
traditional laboratory setting, an accomplishment that has surprised many in the field.
The training that is provided to Aboriginal Health Workers is recognised to be culturally appropriate and
effective in communicating the procedures and requirements for testing. The efficacy of the training is
evidenced by the high levels of quality achieved by the program.
The POCT approach used by QAAMS is recognised by the scientific community to be appropriate and
effective. Both the HbA1c and ACR testing have been shown to be effective and accurate.
The QAAMS program has successfully implemented a clinical trial to demonstrate health outcomes for
the target population. The trial demonstrated that the QAAMS program was indeed having an impact
on diabetes management in Indigenous communities.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 60
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The QAAMS program has a well grounded and highly accepted presence in a number of Aboriginal
communities. Aboriginal Health Professionals and clients alike hold QAAMS in high esteem and it has
been reported to be one of the very few programs operating in the sector that had successfully
navigated the cultural complexities and potential pitfalls of chronic disease management in Indigenous
communities.
The QAAMS program faces many challenges for its successful implementation. These include high turnover
of staff within services; maintenance of quality testing, the heavy reliance of key individuals in the
QAAMS team, and the ability to provide sufficient face-to-face training.
The outcomes and recommendations from this review were considered in the development of the
current 2009-2013 QAAMS program.
Quality Use of Medicines Maximised for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander People (QUMAX) Program
Year: 2007-11
Evaluator: Urbis Pty Ltd
Terms of Reference
The objectives of the evaluation are to:
assess whether the Program has met its objectives
assess the interventions used to help meet the Program’s objectives and the relative impact and
effectiveness of each of these interventions on the Program’s outcomes
monitor the Program during its implementation to assist the Department, the Guild, and the
Program Reference Group to identify any potential Program implementation issues, as they
arise
inform the Commonwealth on the development of future policies and programs that support
improved QUM and access to PBS medicines for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in
rural and urban areas of Australia.
The QUMAX program was funded under the 4 th Community Pharmacy Agreement between the
Department of Health and Ageing and the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, which works in partnership with
the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation to manage the program in 69
Aboriginal Health Services, and supported by a number of community pharmacies. It seeks to improve
QUM and access to PBS medicines for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in rural and urban
areas of Australia
Findings
The findings from the Evaluation will be presented to the Department of Health and Ageing in the 1 st
quarter of 2011.
Audit of Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services
Year: 2006
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
The Office for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health (OATSIH) within the Department of Health
and Ageing (DoHA) has responsibility for administering the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health
Services program.
The program aims to improve access for Indigenous people to culturally appropriate health care
services. Funding is provided to a network of community organisations - mainly some 180 Aboriginal
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 61
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHS) organisations, previously known as Aboriginal Medical
Services.
Terms of Reference
The objective of this audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the management, by
selected ACCHS, of Commonwealth funding provided by OATSIH.
The scope of the audit focussed on three interconnected risk factors that underpin an ACCHS’ ability to
effectively manage Commonwealth Funds. These risk factors are:
Findings
Capacity to deliver the contracted services to an acceptable standard
Viability of the organisation to maintain (and develop) service delivery as an ongoing concern
Compliance with the terms and conditions (obligations) as detailed in the funding agreement.
Overall the audit report showed that the majority of ACCHSs are managing OATSIH program funding
efficiently and effectively, and that there are no high risk systemic issues in the financial management of
the program.
There was one high priority recommendation, which related to the capacity of an organisation to deliver
program outcomes to an acceptable standard. This organisation had already been identified by OATSIH
as a Service of Serious Concern and OATSIH had commenced action to deal with the problems prior to
the commencement of the audit. Funding to this organisation has since been ceased.
There were eight medium priority recommendations, which focussed on the areas of viability, capacity
and compliance. OATSIH acknowledged the identified non-compliance issues, which were addressed at
two levels - at the time of occurrence, and again during the Organisational Risk Assessment Procedure
conducted annually by OATSIH staff.
Evaluation of the Continuous Improvement Projects (CIP) for the
Early Detection and Management of Chronic Disease for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/h4l/publishing.nsf/content/ab793cb0adc4a5cdca2571950002f330/$fil
e/cip%20evaluation%20final%20report.pdf
Terms of Reference
The goals of the CIP evaluation were to:
assess the extent to which the CIP funded projects achieved their objectives
identify key learnings that could be transferred to other primary health care services
to support adopting and strengthening a sustainable and systematic approach to chronic
disease
identify key process learnings that could be adopted by OATSIH to improve future program
management.
The evaluation methodology included: a review of CIP reports and documentation; in-depth
consultations with CIP funded services, including some site visits; consultations with facilitators and
other stakeholders; and analysis and reporting.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 62
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Consistent with its objectives, CIP was successful in assisting funded services to identify and implement
service systems and processes designed to improve the identification and management of chronic
disease. While all services progressed these goals, variation existed as to the extent of this progress
across funded services. Some services were able to clearly demonstrate the adoption of continuous (as
opposed to one-off) improvement processes. Other services demonstrated this to a lesser extent.
Certainly most, if not all, of the services implemented better and more accurate information and
monitoring systems for management of health information. In addition, most services had system
assessment tools to enable them to assess their progress against initial benchmarks.
The evaluation indicated that funded services needed more opportunities to share their experiences
and learning in implementing CIP. It also indicated that further effort would be required to identify and
document the critical success factors, and systems and processes which support a best practice systems
approach to chronic disease management in ACCHSs.
Finally, the evaluation found that CIP funded services needed to consolidate and build upon progress
made in order to progress towards a more sustainable, integrated approach to chronic disease. This
included:
introducing more targeted screening of at-risk groups
ensuring evidence-based clinical practices and standards are consistently applied
expanding the systems improvements to go beyond a focus on a single chronic disease (most
commonly, diabetes) to include patients with other types and forms of chronic disease
progressing the implementation of care planning
taking steps to encourage greater patient self-management, compliance and preventative
activities
further strengthening links with the community to connect patients with external supports and
assistance
moving to better integration of CIP with the service’s broader strategic planning and activities
instilling a culture and equipping staff to conduct continual monitoring and review of data,
systems and processes against standards and benchmarks with a view to identifying areas for
further improvement.
Croc Festivals
Year: 2006
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/annual-reports/annualreport05-
06/oea_ip/performance_audits.html
Croc Festivals are a series of three day festivals for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students living in
remote and rural areas in Australia providing health, education, cultural and sporting activities and
include performances by some schools. These festivals provide a vehicle to support Australian
Government programs, policies and strategies that address issues of health, education, employment
and community engagement in rural and remote Australia and amongst Indigenous communities. The
Croc Festivals are conducted by Indigenous Festivals Australia (IFA), a not-for-profit company limited by
guarantee. The Commonwealth Government is a major sponsor, having contributed $9.13m (including
GST) to the Croc Festival through payments to IFA since its inception in 1998 and committed a further
$3.126m (including GST) for the staging of the 2005 events. The Agreement to supply funding to IFA is
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 63
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
administered by the Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) on behalf of numerous stakeholder
agencies.
Terms of Reference
The overall objective of the audit was to assess whether the Australian Government was receiving value
for money in an open and transparent manner, the extent to which the funds had been utilised in
accordance with the agreement and whether the intended purposes of the program were being met.
Findings
The audit identified the following issues:
While maintaining a whole-of-government approach in terms of stakeholders, the function of
administering the service provider (IFA) and the Commonwealth’s role has been attributed solely to
DoHA. While an Inter-Departmental Committee (IDC) has been established, this committee has no
delegated authority and operates only as a working group. Despite this, the defined contracted
outcomes of the total funding provided was broader than that governed by DoHA and DoHA simply
does not have direct responsibility for many of the policy objectives that IFA is contracted to deliver.
Arguably, the health related outcomes are not the predominate outcomes either, with the main focus
on education and attendance at school.
There is a weakness in the overall governance structure such that:
DoHA has no responsibility for a significant proportion of the contracted outcomes and as such
is limited in its ability to manage them and address the issue of value-for-money
DoHA encounters difficulties every year securing the funds from the contributing agencies and
is consequently impacted in its ability to efficiently administer the contract
The IDC is not formed by senior representatives of the stakeholder funding agencies and
operates only as a working group or consultative committee. If a truly whole-of-government
approach is to be adopted, then the function of the IDC and more specifically, the role of DoHA
needs to be assessed.
There is insufficient research or data to conclude that the Croc Festivals are the only or most
appropriate vehicle for the achievement of the broader government objectives. Notwithstanding the
significant benefits that are evident, the review has not been able to conclude that the Commonwealth
can demonstrate it is receiving value for money. While continued support in the interim was supported
given the existing commitment, an approach to the market was recommended to identify and evaluate
the options available.
Evaluation of the Bringing Them Home and Indigenous Mental
Health Programs
Year: 2007
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website: www.health.gov.au/bringingthemhome
In March 2006, Urbis Keys Young, an independent social research firm, was commissioned by the
Department of Health and Ageing to evaluate the Bringing Them Home Counsellors program, the Link
Up family tracing and reunion program, the Social and Emotional Well-Being Regional Centres program,
and the Mental Health Service Delivery projects.
The report of the evaluation was launched in Melbourne, Victoria on 9 May 2007.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 64
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
These four programs were evaluated as a group because they are inter-related and complementary.
The aim of the evaluation was to evaluate the programs’ impacts, assess future demand and identify
ways of strengthening their coordination.
Terms of Reference
The aims of the project were to
Key Findings
Assess the impact of each program on its target client group(s), and the likely future demand
for the services these programs provide
Develop recommendations on strategies for strengthening coordination and collaboration
among the services, with a view to achieving a more integrated, client-focussed service for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people affected by past government policies and practices
of forced removal
Examine how effectively and efficiently each program is being delivered. Identify any
impediments that services are experiencing and propose strategies for overcoming any barriers
Develop recommendations to inform future program objectives, directions and alignment, with
a view to achieving greater synergies among the programs
With regard to SEWB Regional Centres, assess their capacity to provide services to personnel
who are widely dispersed within their state. Investigate and comment on whether the current
locational and organisational arrangements remain appropriate
Identify best practice models and possible alternative service delivery models for consideration
Develop recommendations to improve reporting and accountability.
The evaluation found that:
The Link Up and Bringing Them Home Counselling (BTHC) programs have provided services to a large
number of Indigenous clients (who in most instances would not have received services otherwise)
generally in culturally appropriate ways.
There is a generally high level of client satisfaction and positive outcomes for clients of the Link Up and
BTHC Programs, and Mental Health Service Delivery Projects. There is a lower level of satisfaction with
the Regional Centres.
There is a significant level of unmet demand for the services, and services are under-resourced for the
high workloads currently experienced. The lack of general social and emotional wellbeing services for
the Indigenous community often results in BTH counsellors fulfilling this role, and makes it difficult for
them to concentrate on their core business.
Given the trans-generational impact of forced separation, the demand for services is likely to continue
to be at least the same level for the foreseeable future.
The findings and suggested future directions of the evaluation are being reviewed and a response is
being developed with the goals of reinvigorating the programs and strengthening the delivery of the
funded services.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 65
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Access to Major Health
Programs
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website:
http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/public/services/indigenous/files/aboriginal_torres_strait_islander_
access_to_major_health_programs.pdf
The report on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Access to Major Health Programs was conducted
during 2005-06 for the Department of Health and Ageing and Medicare Australia. Its purpose is to
provide an up-to-date picture of Aboriginal and Torres Strait peoples’ access to major health programs.
The work included consideration of a range of Australian Government initiatives that have been
implemented since the completion of an earlier report in 1997 by Keys Young on Indigenous access to
Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
The present research involved national stakeholder consultation, visits to twelve urban, regional and
remote locations across Australia, statistical analysis and the conduct of four inter-related surveys with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Services, community pharmacies, general practitioners and
Medicare staff.
Findings
The recommendations in the report call for action around a number of issues including:
Improving Indigenous Australians’ enrolment in Medicare
Increased resourcing of Medicare Liaison Officers to improve Indigenous Medicare access
Changes to Medicare which reflect the health care delivery needs to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander people
Greater work by Divisions of General Practice to assist Indigenous health services to improve
accreditation and immunisation
Increasing awareness of hearing services and diabetes testing
Culturally appropriate education and training for doctors and nurses
Greater professional recognition for Aboriginal Health Workers
Better access to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) through addressing a range of
barriers including in non-remote, improvements to the safety net, hospital discharge
procedures, medication reviews, quality use of medicines and community education.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance
Framework
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Australian Health Minister’s Advisory Council (AHMAC)
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-oatsih-pubsframereport
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 66
June 2010

Terms of Reference
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Performance Framework (HPF) has been developed
under the auspices of AHMAC to:
measure the impact of the National Strategic Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Health (NSFATSIH) and inform policy analysis, planning and program implementation;
provide the basis for streamlining reporting on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and
health care delivery; and
provide a focus for data development activities.
The HPF complements the qualitative reporting on progress in the implementation of the NSFATSIH
through the NSFATSIH Progress against Jurisdictional Implementation Plans reports.
The HPF has approximately 70 measures in three groups:
health status and outcomes;
determinants of health including socioeconomic and behavioural factors; and
health system performance.
The first Report against the HPF was released in November 2006. It reports against 64 of the 70
measures. It finds that there have been improvements in some aspects of health for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Australians, while some areas are unchanged and some are worsening.
Areas of improvement include: mortality and infant mortality, deaths caused by circulatory disease,
hospitalisation for pneumonia, expansion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health care,
immunisation, education and unemployment.
Areas of concern include: deaths caused by chronic diseases, hospitalisation for injury and poisoning,
end stage kidney disease, low birth weight, chronic ear disease, oral health, sexually transmissible
infections, smoking including smoking during pregnancy, nutrition, obesity, relative per capita health
expenditure and access to health services.
National Suicide Prevention Strategy (mainstream program with
Indigenous component)
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/mentalhealth/publishing.nsf/content/EAF3A9E255355D1FCA2573070
01B4C10/$File/Public%20Report%20-%20May%209.pdf
The National Suicide Prevention Strategy (NSPS) was established by the Australian Government in 1999.
In August 2005, the Department of Health and Ageing (DoHA) commissioned Urbis Keys Young to
undertake an evaluation of the NSPS.
The main purpose of the evaluation was to (1) examine how effectively the National Suicide Prevention
Strategy has met its aims and objective, and (2) inform future suicide prevention activity in Australia.
The main purposes of the evaluation are:
to consider the effectiveness, efficiency and appropriateness of the activity funded to date
under the NSPS
to increase the evidence base for future planning
to ensure fidelity to good practice models and the stated intentions of programs
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 67
June 2010

Key Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
to describe outcomes for individual consumers and population groups
to provide accountability for taxpayer funds.
In broad terms the 2006 Evaluation found that the NSPS:
was seen by most stakeholders as appropriate and in line with the knowledge base at the time
recognising that a refinement of focus was required to take into account recent advances in
knowledge
that effectiveness of the projects was mostly evident in capacity building with some increases
evident in help seeking behaviour and referral pathways
that efficiency could be strengthened by addressing governance structures and roles
improving communication and information management and ensuring that the level of funding
to jurisdictions relates to suicide rates and local issues.
Evaluation of PBS Medicine Supply Arrangements for Remote
Area Aboriginal Health Services Under S100 of the National
Health Act
Year: 2005
Evaluator: Margaret Kelaher, Debbie Taylor-Thomson, Nea Harrison, Lynette O'Donoghue, David Dunt,
Tony Barnes and Ian Anderson (Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health and University of
Melbourne)
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/79D490F2B41B2C50CA256F880005CE6
C/$File/report.pdf
Terms of Reference
The evaluation examined the performance of special PBS medicine supply arrangements for remote
area Aboriginal health services under the provisions of s100 of the National Health Act 1953 in terms of
its aims, which were to:
Findings
improve access to PBS medicine by clients of remote area Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Health Services (ATSIHS)
maintain compliance with existing State and Territory statutory requirements
minimise administrative complexity, within the context of appropriate accountability.
The results of the evaluation indicate that the program resulted in increased access to medicine in all
jurisdictions. There was increased access to oral hypoglycaemics, ACE inhibitors, asthma medicine and
acute medicines. These medicines are all used to treat conditions particularly problematic in the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community. S100 has generally not only maintained compliance
with State and Territory laws, but in many cases funding from the program has been used to improve it.
There are still compliance issues in some jurisdictions, but these do not appear to be the result of the
program. According to the evaluation, staff coped well with the administrative aspects of the system
and made some concrete suggestions to improve them. However, staff shortages and lack of
appropriate systems were issues for both compliance and administration.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 68
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The main tension is in determining whether the s100 arrangements should retain their relatively narrow
focus, with additional support provided from complementary initiatives such as the support allowance,
or whether the program itself should be expanded.
Review of the Australian Government's Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Primary Health Care Program
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Various (see 7 volumes below)
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-oatsih-pubsreviewphc.htm
In 2003, a series of papers were commissioned to provide information, analysis and advice to
government as a part of a Review of the Australian Government's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Primary Health Care Program. The review examined issues relating to funding for comprehensive
primary health care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and the impact of activity in this
area. The commissioned material complemented information obtained from previous reviews and
evaluations, as well as that obtained from program data.
Volume 1. National Strategies for Improving Indigenous Health and Health Care
Evaluators: Judith Dwyer, Kate Silburn and Gai Wilson, La Trobe University (overall program
assessment)
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/vol1national.pdf
Terms of Reference
The authors were required to provide an assessment of the level and impact of current funding and
health care provision for Indigenous Australians; a strategy for improving the effectiveness of health
care for Indigenous people; and advice regarding performance indicators against which to monitor the
effectiveness of Australian Government investment in Indigenous health care.
Findings
The report concluded that government commitment to overcoming Indigenous disadvantage requires
that policy and funding decisions be based on two criteria: the potential to provide equitable access to
effective health care; and the potential for improvement in Indigenous health. Good progress has been
made in recent years in the development of the service delivery system and system infrastructure, both
mainstream and Indigenous-specific. Current access to, and investment in, Indigenous primary health
care is too low, though the existing level is producing some positive health impacts and outcomes.
Investment in comprehensive primary health care should be increased to a level between three and six
times the national average per capita expenditure.
Funding should be allocated through both Indigenous-specific and mainstream funding programs, and
to both Indigenous-specific and mainstream providers. The principle of community control of planning,
management and delivery of Indigenous primary health care services should be maintained, in
accordance with the National Strategic Framework. Community participation in partnerships and other
forms of collaboration with mainstream health care agencies is also needed.
The Primary Health Care Access Program should continue to be used as the major vehicle for additional
funding and for the development of effective partnerships and plans. Urban Indigenous-specific
agencies should continue to be supported, in light of the needs of urban Indigenous Australians, and in
recognition of the roles these agencies play in developing the capacity of the mainstream health
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 69
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
system. Indigenous health care should continue to be funded and administered as part of the health
portfolio. Outcomes and impacts of increased funding should be monitored through the National
Performance Framework currently under development. Sustained monitoring of a small number of valid
indicators, focused on those conditions and targets that are sensitive to improvements in primary
health care, and supported by robust data collection and analysis, are needed.
Volume 2. Investment Analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Primary
Health Care Program in the Northern Territory
Evaluators: Carol Beaver, Centre for Chronic Disease, University of Queensland and Yuejen Zhao, Health
Gains Planning Unit, Department of Health and Community Services, Northern Territory
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/2investment.pdf
Terms of Reference
This report was commissioned to assess the cost-effectiveness of current services provided for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in the Northern Territory.
Findings
The report found that investments in primary health care result in prevention of complex
diseases/disorders and hospital admissions. However, the report highlighted that after extrapolating
the potential impact of the current investment in primary health care, projected funding allocations will
not be able to cater for treatment of the growing burden of chronic disease in the Indigenous
population. The report found that if funding was not provided, the estimated total health costs on other
parts of the system would be higher. This would exceed $136 million over five years after funding was
no longer provided, $470 million in 10 years, and $1,261 million over 20 years (which is largely expected
to be hospital, renal dialysis and some Medical Benefits Scheme (MBS)/Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme
(PBS) costs).
The report also found that investment in prevention and health promotion is important to reduce the
burden of illness. The potential impact of increasing investment was also modelled. This involved a
staged increase in investments in primary health care across the continuum of health promotion,
prevention and clinical care rising to double the 2001–02 levels of resources in real terms over a period
of ten years. Modelling estimated that this investment would save an additional three disability adjusted
life years per person. There are potential cost savings within the broader health sector resulting from
different mixes of investment in health promotion, prevention, clinical primary care for new and
existing cases, and hospital care.
Volume 3. Costings Models for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Services
Evaluator: Econtech Pty Ltd
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/3costings.pdf
Terms of Reference
The purpose of the report is to answer the following questions based on the dual nature of health
services for Indigenous people:
What would have to be spent on primary health services for Indigenous Australians (not distinguishing
between general and Indigenous specific health services) to provide per capita expenditure relative to
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 70
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
non- Indigenous Australians that reflected relative morbidities? This is a relative needs or population
benchmark approach.
What would have to be spent on Indigenous-specific primary health services for Indigenous Australians
to provide them with universal access to Indigenous specific programs? This is a supply side, or resource
requirements approach.
Findings
The study noted that per-capita spending on health services would have to be about 2.2 times higher for
Indigenous Australians than for non-Indigenous Australians ($5575 versus $2518). However, Indigenous
people tend to have lower utilization rates of mainstream health services, exacerbated by access
difficulties to mainstream services due to the dispersed nature of the Indigenous population. The health
circumstances of Indigenous Australians vary significantly, depending on urban, rural and remote
settings. Preliminary results, based on generalizing from the case studies to the Indigenous population
as a whole, suggest that the total cost of an Indigenous-specific universal primary health care system,
on top of Medicare, is in the order of $409 million (or approximately $890 per Indigenous person).
More money is required to deliver Indigenous-specific health services in very remote areas, compared to
rural and urban areas. The cost per Indigenous person in very remote areas, for example is estimated at
$2789 while the corresponding figure in urban areas is $399 per capita. The report estimates that a
comprehensive service in rural and urban areas may cause the costs to increase significantly from $409
million to $570 million. The increase in costs would be considerable because large numbers of
Indigenous Australians live in Australian rural and urban areas.
Volume 4. Capacity Development in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health
Service Delivery – Case Studies
Evaluators: Cindy Shannon and Helen Longbottom, Shannon Consulting Pty Ltd
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/4capacity.pdf
Summary
The case studies used information available at the national and local level. An ‘inputs-processes-outputsintermediate
outcomes-outcomes’ model was used to measure the impact of a health service. Central
to the model is acknowledgment of the fact that outcomes are influenced by a myriad of socialeconomic
and biological pathways, and that it is difficult to measure the contribution of a specific factor
such as a health program (DoHA 2003). Additionally, the measurement of health outcomes must
encompass factors such as changes in physical, social and emotional functioning, quality of life, and
levels of empowerment, as well as the more traditional measure of life expectancy.
The model allows for some understanding of the relationships between inputs and outcomes, and
acknowledges the lag time between investments in the health care system, capacity building within the
system, and health outputs and outcomes. The model describes both intermediate outcomes and
outcomes. An intermediate outcome is one that has a direct relationship to the work of a service (an
output) and can use evidence from the literature to support its relationship to a health outcome. For
example, a service may run a cervical screening program that results in increased rates of screening (an
intermediate outcome). There is evidence from literature that increased rates of screening improve
health outcomes for cervical cancer (outcome). In many instances it is possible to document changes in
intermediate outcomes but it is too early to document changes in actual outcomes.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 71
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Volume 5. Cancer, Health Services & Indigenous Australians
Evaluator: John Condon, Co-operative Research Centre for Aboriginal and Tropical Health
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/5cancer.pdf
Terms of Reference
The report aimed to examine the performance of the Australian health system in relation to cancer
control for Indigenous Australians in the Northern Territory.
Findings
The study provides evidence that the experience of Indigenous Australians and cancer indicates that the
Australian health system is not operating as effectively for Indigenous people as for other Australians.
Whilst cancer is relatively rare, cancer mortality is higher for Indigenous Australians than other
Australians. The high incidence of smoking and alcohol consumption correlates with increased smoking
and alcohol related cancers amongst Indigenous Australians. For cervical cancer, Indigenous women
have higher incidence and lower survival rates than non-Indigenous women.
However, the report highlights that the incidence of cervical cancer for women can be lessened within a
community that prioritises primary health care. The report stresses that the cancers which have higher
incidence in Indigenous people are all at least partially preventable in the non-Indigenous population.
The report provides evidence that primary health care (particularly Aboriginal community-controlled
health services); population health screening; improving specialist service; and community action to
reduce behavioural and environmental health factors can reduce the impact of cancers in the
Indigenous population.
Volume 6. Maternal and Child Health Care Services: Actions in the Primary Health Care
Setting to Improve the Health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women of
Childbearing Age, Infants and Young Children
Evaluator: Sandra Eades, Menzies School of Health Research
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/6maternal.pdf
Terms of Reference
The report draws on evidence from relevant Australian and international health literature and four case
studies to present a rationale for strengthening the provision of maternal and child health services
through currently funded primary health care services.
Findings
According to the literature, Indigenous mothers are on average younger than non-Indigenous mothers,
with 21.7% of all births being to teenagers compared with 4.5% of non Indigenous births being to
teenagers. Indigenous babies are about twice as likely to be born of low birth weight (12.8% compared
with 6.5%). This has been the situation since about 1991, with no national improvements since that time.
The report reviews the relevant health literature and provides an overview of issues, including risk and
protective factors relevant to child and maternal health outcomes. These include untreated infections,
cigarette smoking and interventions; alcohol use in pregnancy; antenatal knowledge and use of folate
to prevent neural tube defects, pregnancy intervals and use of contraception; antenatal health care;
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 72
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
postnatal care; breastfeeding; introduction of solids and feeding in the first year of life and
immunisation.
The report highlights the importance of access to high quality, appropriate primary health care in
improving the health and wellbeing of women during pregnancy and for birth and child health
outcomes. Improvements in health outcomes have been demonstrated by a number of Indigenous
specific primary health care services. The report also advocates for an increased focus on “acrossgovernment
initiatives” to meet the early developmental needs of disadvantaged children.
Volume 7. Substance Misuse and Primary Health Care Among Indigenous Australians
Evaluator: Dennis Gray, National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University of Technology; Sherry
Saggers, Centre for Social Research, Edith Cowan University; David Atkinson, Rural Clinical School,
University of Western Australia; Phillipa Strempel, National Drug Research Institute, Curtin University of
Technology
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/EC09AB903EAD9CA3CA25722B0083428
F/$File/7substance.pdf
Terms of Reference
The purpose of the review is to examine: a primary health care approach to substance misuse among
Indigenous Australians in the context of: patterns of use; the health harms associated with substance
misuse; the underlying causes of higher levels of use in Indigenous populations; and the broader range
of Indigenous substance misuse interventions.
Findings
Since 1994, there has been an increase in tobacco use, alcohol consumption and cannabis use among
the Indigenous population, as measured from the 1994 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Survey (NATSIS). The consequences of substance related health harms are serious, including hospital
admissions and death. For example, evidence from Western Australia and the Northern Territory
indicates that the hospital admissions rates for tobacco-caused conditions of Indigenous people are at
least twice those of non-Indigenous people. Also, hospital admissions for alcohol conditions are at least
1.5 times greater, among Indigenous people. The complexity of issues surrounding substance misuse
requires a holistic approach to address the problems such as primary prevention and early intervention.
However, unless the underlying social inequalities are addressed (such as education, unemployment
and community) and unless Indigenous people are involved, the health impact will be minimal.
Collaborations with local communities, other agencies and local, state and territory governments can
lead to enhanced effectiveness of substance misuse interventions.
Review of the National Indigenous Pneumococcal Influenza
Immunisation Program, 2003
Year: 2004
Evaluator: National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance of Vaccine Preventable Diseases
(NCIRS)
Terms of Reference
A formal evaluation was carried out for the first year of the program (1999), as a component of an
evaluation of the Influenza Vaccine Program for Older Australians. Since then, program monitoring has
been through two mechanisms. First, yearly reports from the States and Territories as required under
the National Indigenous Pneumococcal Influenza Immunisation (NIPII) program funding agreements;
and second, Service Activity Reports provided by Aboriginal Community Controlled Health
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 73
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Organisations (ACCHOs). During this period several issues emerged as needing further investigation
through a formal evaluation. The aims of this evaluation are threefold. They are to:
Findings
Provide a best possible assessment of the impact of the NIPII program. This includes estimates
of vaccination coverage, wastage and leakage, and morbidity. Where the data are insufficient to
provide precise or reliable estimates, this component may be limited to a description of the
available data and recommendations for improvements to the data collection system.
Describe the relative contributions of different provider types to the immunisation of
Indigenous adults, and to describe the range of immunisation service provision models currently
being used and their effectiveness, highlighting those which have been particularly successful
and which have potential to be applied more widely.
Evaluate the effectiveness at the national and regional levels of the methods used to promote
the program.
The NIPII program has achieved a moderate impact, with vaccination coverage of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander adults aged 50 or more years estimated at 51% for influenza and 25% for pneumococcal
vaccine.
A decrease in invasive pneumococcal disease following the introduction of adult vaccination has
been shown in northern Queensland, but not in the Northern Territory. Although difficult to
measure from national datasets, significant impacts on disease, hospitalisation and death can be
expected from good vaccination coverage in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults. The
evidence supports a higher effectiveness for influenza vaccine than for pneumococcal vaccine.
State services, ACCHOs and GPs all make significant contributions to NIPII program delivery at a
national level of a roughly similar magnitude. There are significant differences between States
and Territories, both in contributions of different provider types, and in the support provided at
Government level. The provision of vaccination services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
adults is dependent on a functional primary health care system for Indigenous people.
Therefore most of the issues that need to be addressed to improve NIPII program delivery are
overarching Indigenous health care issues, not specific to immunisation.
Review of the Implementation of the National Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Eye Health Program
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Centre for Remote Health
Website:
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/53FF1514E63D1AC3CA25722B00834280/
$File/Eye%20Health.pdf
Terms of Reference
The review focused on the implementation of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Eye
Health Program including:
an examination of the extent of the implementation of the program and the effectiveness and
efficiency of the key elements of the program
options for strengthening the program’s integration with primary health care services for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
identifying how the program articulates with mainstream eye health programs and services, and
how such relationships could be strengthened
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 74
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
how to improve Indigenous Australians access to primary eye health care and specialists
models of service delivery where there have been demonstrated improvements in access to
services, eye health care and in eye health outcomes
identifying mechanisms to improve data available to report on program progress.
The review identified the need for the program to be more strongly integrated into primary health care,
and for eye health to be addressed across the whole of the health system, including mainstream
programs and services. It outlined twenty-four recommendations, including:
eye health must be addressed as a component of comprehensive primary health care
mainstream programs and services, including specialist services, have the same responsibility to
address the health needs of Indigenous Australians as other Australians and at all levels of the
health system
regional approaches to eye health will, over time, place more emphasis on strengthening the
capacity of local primary health care services in an organised approach to chronic disease
detection and management
trachoma control in endemic regions requires a public health response with the involvement of
public health units, primary health care services, and housing and essential services
existing capacity in eye health in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary heath care
setting must be preserved
program development and implementation should be based on the best available evidence.
The Australian Government supports the majority of the review recommendations. It also
acknowledges the need for stronger integration of the program into primary health care while ensuring
that mainstream services make an appropriate contribution to improving eye health for Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Audit Report No. 15 2002-03: The Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Health Program Follow Up Audit
Year: 2002
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2002-03_Audit_Report_15.pdf
Terms of Reference
The audit reviewed the extent to which the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) had
implemented the recommendations of Audit Report No. 13 of 1998-1999, Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Health Program, taking account of any changed circumstances or new administrative issues
identified as impacting the implementation of these recommendations.
Findings
The Department of Health and Ageing (Health’s) progress against the implementation of
recommendations from the 1998 audit were deemed implemented, partially implemented or not
implemented. Of the 12 recommendations from the 1998 audit, Health has implemented eight, partially
implemented one, and not implemented three recommendations.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 75
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Co-ordinated Care
Trials, National Evaluation Summary
Year: 2001
Evaluator: KPMG Consulting
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/health-oatsih-pubscoord.htm/$FILE/coord.pdf
Terms of Reference
The evaluation outlines the background, description, participant experiences and outcomes of the four
Coordinated Care Trials conducted in Aboriginal communities between 1997 and 1999. The trials were
located in Katherine (NT), the Tiwi Islands (NT), Wilcannia (NSW) and Perth/Bunbury (WA). The principal
aim of the trial process was to test alternative financing arrangements and through this, improve the
quality of care for those with a diverse range of health care needs. The Indigenous trials included
catchment populations characterised by either individual enrolment of clients, families or a whole of
population approach.
Findings
The report states that there has been significant progress in improving access to services, health care
planning and population health programs that address priority needs at the community level. ‘The
success of the trials is evidence of the progress that can be made in improving Aboriginal health when
governments, local communities and health services and organisations work together in partnership.
Cited positive outcomes of the trial included enhanced access to services (attributed primarily to more
flexible funding); services becoming more appropriate; significant progress in the development and
implementation of organisational structures and processes necessary to the coordinated care model;
confirmation of the value of funds pooling; improved individual empowerment; and greater
understanding of the importance of community empowerment. More specific outcomes claimed
included progress in identifying client need, establishing care plans, and establishing population health
initiatives’. However, there was insufficient quantitative information to assess the impact that care
planning has had on service delivery.
Although the primary aim of the trials was to improve the health status of individuals and communities,
it was not expected that quantifiable improvements in health status would be achieved over the trial
period. This was partly due to the short duration of the trials and partly because of the broader context
of Aboriginal health.
Evaluation of the Emotional and Social Well Being (Mental
Health) Action Plan
Year: 2001
Evaluator: Urbis Keys Young
Website: http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/Publishing.nsf/Content/health-oatsih-pubseswbap.htm/$FILE/eswb.pdf
Terms of Reference
The evaluation aimed to provide a description of what has happened under the action plan particularly
in relation to:
improving access to culturally appropriate high quality health care for emotional and social
wellbeing
improving mental health outcomes
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 76
June 2010

Findings
addressing issues affecting youth suicide
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
enhancing the appropriateness and effectiveness of mainstream and specific mental health care
services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
an assessment of the progress that has been made including identification of factors which have
assisted or hindered progress in the implementation of the action plan, recognising the
importance of basic steps undertaken in areas such as intersectoral collaboration and capacitybuilding
a description of approaches which have worked well
suggestions as to which components of the action plan could appropriately be applied more
broadly
suggestions for additional strategies which might be used to provide sustainable and culturally
appropriate emotional and social wellbeing services.
The report noted that a good deal of activity had been undertaken in the area of social and emotional
wellbeing over the previous four years. A particular success of the action plan had been in the area of
curriculum development. There are now 15-20 curricula with significant community input and control.
However, only a limited number of courses had been fully implemented. According to the report,
communication to enhance understanding of emotional and social wellbeing in Indigenous communities
appears to have been at least moderately successful.
Communication measures were put in place to enhance understanding of emotional and social
wellbeing in Indigenous communities. However, because the field of emotional and social wellbeing is
largely still in the capacity-building stage of development, the report noted that it is premature to
determine whether the emotional and social wellbeing of Indigenous individuals and communities has
improved. It concluded that the core direction of the action plan had demonstrated effectiveness and
offered the promise, in the long run, of improving the wellbeing of Indigenous peoples.
The evaluation proposed that the action plan be rewritten and developed as a framework document
which would serve as a focus for future direction. The department has since published such a
framework document: A National Strategic Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’
Mental Health and Social and Emotional Well Being 2004-2009. The framework was endorsed by the
Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council, and has strong links to the National Mental Health Plan
2003-2008.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 77
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Department of Families, Housing, Community
Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA)
Closing the Gap in Indigenous Disadvantage Initiative:
Performance Information Reporting
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
This potential cross- portfolio audit would examine the performance information architecture that has
been developed to enable robust reporting against these targets and the extent to which agencyspecific
performance information and reporting systems have been adapted to be able to generate
reliable information relating to these targets and progress within the seven Building Blocks. The COAG
Reform Council’s 2010 National Indigenous Reform Agreement Baseline Performance Report, issued in
May 2010, has highlighted a range of gaps in the existing performance framework and has
recommended steps for improvement. There is also ongoing work being undertaken by a series of
departmental committees and working groups. Timing of an audit would take the work of these groups
and the recommendations of the COAG Reform Council into consideration
Implementation of the COAG Service Delivery Principles for
Programs and Services for Indigenous Australians
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
This potential cross-portfolio audit would examine the organisational initiatives undertaken to date by
Australian Government agencies to put these principles into operation and ensure that they are being
adhered to. The audit would also consider what overarching arrangements exist to monitor adherence
to the principles across governments.
Income management and the Basicscard
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
This potential cross-portfolio audit would examine aspects of the implementation and ongoing
operation of income management and the BasicsCard. This could include the Department of Human
Services’ management of the replacement BasicsCard tender process and Centrelink’s day-to-day
administration of income management.
Capacity development for Indigenous service delivery
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Australian Government agencies rely on Indigenous organisations and provide significant annual
funding to the delivery of programs and services. The ability or capacity of these organisations to deliver
the program and services for which they are funded has a strong influence on the delivery of the service
and on the ultimate achievement of outcomes sought by government. An audit would assess the extent
to which key Australian Government agencies recognise and seek to reduce service delivery risks posed
by capacity constraints in Indigenous organisations.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 78
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
HOME Advice and Reconnect
The aims of the evaluation would be a qualitative assessment of the effectiveness of the intervention’s
service providers’ delivery, and a quantitative analysis of the efficiency of the service providers using the
data collection currently held (from HOME and Reconnect).
Formal Review of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote
Indigenous Housing (NPARIH)
Years: 2012 and 2017
The National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing (NPARIH) provides funding of $5.5
billion over 10 years (2008-2018) to improve the housing and living standards of Indigenous Australians
living in remote Indigenous communities.
Under the NPARIH, the State and Northern Territory Governments are responsible for delivering
housing and related infrastructure in remote Indigenous communities.
The NPARIH funding will be used to:
Increase housing stock in remote communities through the construction of new and
replacement dwellings
Improve the safety, amenity and functionality of existing homes through a program of upgrades
and refurbishments
Maintain the safety, amenity and functionality of existing homes through a regular and
systematic repair and maintenance program
Reform and improve tenancy and property management and support programs
Provide training and employment opportunities for local Indigenous people in housing
construction, repair and maintenance and property management fields.
While not responsible for the delivery of Indigenous housing and infrastructure the Australian
Government, as the main funding provider, has an ongoing role under the NPARIH to work closely with
each jurisdiction to agree funding priorities and targets and to monitor achievements and outcomes in
the context of ‘closing the gap’ objectives and value for money.
Under the NPARIH, a review of the agreement will occur in 2012 and 2017 with regard to progress in
respect of the agreed outcomes. The NPARIH also states that the review will be undertaken by an
independent party to be engaged by the Australian Government.
Further details of the review including Terms of Reference and a review framework are yet to be
developed.
Evaluation of the Remote Service Delivery (RSD) National
Partnership
Year: 2011- 2014
The RSD evaluation strategy will set out the interactions between monitoring/reporting activity,
formative and summative evaluation.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 79
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of the National Urban and Regional Service Delivery
Strategy for Indigenous Australians (URS)
Year: 2011- 2014
A proposed URS review strategy will assess the extent to which the URS, agreed in July 2009, has
‘driven’ enhanced service delivery and better coordination and integration of services and programs,
both mainstream and Indigenous specific.
A focus of the URS is the contribution made to outcomes for Indigenous people in urban and regional
areas by Indigenous specific and mainstream National Partnership Agreements (NPAs) in health,
housing and homelessness, early childhood, education and economic participation. Another area of
focus for the URS is activities to be included in Overarching Bilateral Indigenous Plans for each State and
Territory.
In 2010-11, there may be a need to undertake some field research and evaluation studies in urban and
regional areas to determine the extent of take-up of services by Indigenous people and to report on
improved levels of access (and possible barriers) to services.
Reconciliation Australia
Year: July 2012
The evaluation will examine Reconciliation Australia’s administration, operations and outcomes under
its funding arrangement 2010-11 – 2012-13.
Youth in Communities
Year: 2010 – 12
Evaluator: Courage Partners
Youth in Communities (YIC) is a measure under the Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory
initiative. YIC aims to deliver a comprehensive youth strategy in the Northern Territory (NT) that
effectively diverts young Indigenous people from at risk behaviours, that improves their life choices and
outcomes through engaging them in positive activities and that strengthens youth services
infrastructure, both in the number of youth workers employed and the facilities available.
Terms of Reference
Develop an evaluation framework and methodology for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness
and impact of the funded YIC activities, including identification of existing relevant data and data
collection resources
Undertake an interim evaluation to monitor and review implementation to date of the YIC activities and
to provide recommendations for improving service delivery and more closely aligning program outputs
and activities to planned program outcomes.
Undertake a final evaluation to assess the effectiveness and impact of the YIC program,
including successes, challenges, lessons learnt and opportunities for further development of a youth
services infrastructure in the NT arising out of this program. A final YIC evaluation report outlining
the successes, challenges, lessons learnt and opportunities for further development of youth services in
the NT will then be completed and be available for public release.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 80
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Strategic Indigenous Housing Infrastructure Program, (SIHIP)
Year: 2011
The evaluation will examine the SIHIP Alliance Model of housing delivery in remote Northern Territory
communities.
Safe Havens
Year: 2011
Evaluator: TBD
The evaluation will be conducted to determine the effectiveness of the Safe havens initiative (Qld) in
addressing family or domestic violence in the Coen, Mornington Island, Cherbourg and Palm Island
communities.
Homelessness National Partnership
Year: 2011
Evaluator: TBD
The review of the Agreement will investigate the progress made by parties towards achieving the
agreed outcomes and any issues regarding this Agreement, the Plan and performance monitoring.
Community Development Employment Program (CDEP)
Year: 2011
A post implementation review of the CDEP reforms introduced in 2009 is planned for 2011. The review
will examine the impact of the reforms. The review is also expected to include an examination of
whether the program is achieving the best training, employment and social inclusion outcomes for
Indigenous people. FaHCSIA and DEEWR will collaborate on the review.
Petrol Sniffing Strategy (PSS) outcome evaluation
Year: 2011
This will be a summative evaluation that investigates and assesses the outcomes of the PSS in relation
to criteria such as appropriateness, effectiveness and sustainability. It will examine how all the
components of the PSS Eight Point Plan interact to achieve the aims of the PSS at the community,
regional and whole of government levels.
Regional Partnership Agreement evaluation
Year: 2011
This evaluation will review the effectiveness of the Groote Regional Partnership Agreement and its
impact on peoples living in the region.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 81
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Targeted Community Care (Mental Health) Program (Phase 2)
Year: 2010-2011
Evaluator: TBD
The phased evaluation of the three community mental health initiatives under the Targeted Community
Care (Mental Health) Program aims to address the changing context of community mental health and
FaHCSIA’s role more broadly in mental health service delivery. The three initiatives are Personal Helpers
and Mentors, mental Health Respite and Mental Health Community Based services. The phase 2
evaluation now underway will focus on service delivery issues for Indigenous Australians, and rural and
remote service delivery.
Substance Abuse Intelligence Desk Review
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination (OIPC)
The evaluation will inform policy deliberations about future funding of the Substance Abuse Intelligence
Desk (SAID), and will assess if SAIDs contributions to Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory are
effective and represent good value for money.
Food Security Pilot Study
Year: 2010 and 2011
Evaluator: Stantons International
The Study aims to develop and test the impact of standards for remote community stores, based on an
initial assessment of store performance, an assessment of the broader food security of the community,
and a follow-up assessment of store performance and community food security in 12 months. The pilots
are conducted in 13 pilot sites across remote areas of Australia.
The Study will inform and further develop the National Strategy for Food Security in Remote Indigenous
communities. This is a critical step in informing the further development of national standards and
identifying key areas that pose a food security risk in remote stores and in remote indigenous
communities.
Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory evaluation
Year: 2010-11
This evaluation examines the Closing the Gap in the Northern Territory (formerly known as the Northern
Territory Emergency Response (NTER)) from a whole of government perspective. The broad goal of the
evaluation is to establish whether governments have been effective in delivering a coordinated and
integrated suite of services and initiatives that improve the safety, health and education outcomes of
children and vulnerable people in the affected NT communities.
The evaluation will build on the results of the separate measure evaluations. To study key whole-ofgovernment
topics, it makes use of a staged approach involving a series of studies based on mixed
qualitative and quantitative methods, in line with ethics guidelines for research with Indigenous people,
culminating in an outcome report.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 82
June 2010

Key deliverables are:
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
A range of reports produced throughout 2010 and early 2011 which would allow for progressive
feedback on whole-of-government topics such as: coordination, community engagement,
safety, nutrition and health, school readiness and school attendance and performance.
An outcomes report synthesising all results of the evaluation research due in 2011
Better practice in Financial Management Program services
Year: 2010-2011
Evaluator: TBD
The better practice in Financial Management Program services project is designed to assess the
efficiency and effectiveness of the Financial Management Program (FMP), to identify best practice
within FMP services and to make recommendations for improving the program. In scope of this project
are Emergency Relief, Commonwealth Financial Counselling, Money Management Services, and the
expansion of NILS ®, AddsUP, StepUP, Saver Plus and Progress Loans.
Native Title Representative Bodies Client Satisfaction Survey
Year: 2010-11
The FaHCSIA Native Title and Land Rights Program provides funds to a network of 15 Native Title
Representative Bodies and Native Title Service Providers (collectively referred to as NTRBs), established
under the Native Title Act 1993. The program aims to support the conclusion of native title claims to
improve economic, cultural and social participation for Indigenous Australians.
Critics of the native title system have described it as slow, complex and costly, while not delivering
benefits to Indigenous Australians.
The Australian Government has committed to the development of strategies that will speed up the
resolution of native title claims, to ensure real and timely outcomes are delivered to Indigenous
Australians. The ability of NTRBs to perform their functions efficiently and effectively is critical to
furthering the Government’s policy of settling native title claims as promptly as possible.
Terms of reference
The consultant will undertake a client satisfaction survey to examine native title holders’ satisfaction
with how NTRB services are performing their role of acting for the native title claimants in relation to
their functions under the Native Title Act 1993, particularly in relation to the furtherance of native title
claims and agreements. It will explore the key drivers of both satisfaction and dissatisfaction with NTRB
services to identify areas that are meeting client needs and others where there may be opportunities to
assist NTRBs to improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island peoples.
Findings
Findings are expected to be available in June 2011.
Indigenous Parenting Support
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: TBD
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 83
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Expansion Playgroups for Indigenous Families (Locational
Supported and Intensive Supported Playgroups)
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: TBD
Army Aboriginal Community Assistance Program (AACAP)
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
To assess the strategic direction, planning and implementation of AACAP and how the program
contributes to the broader objectives of the Australian Government for environmental health in remote
Indigenous communities.
Cape York Welfare Reform evaluation- Stage 2
Year: 2010 and 2011
Stage 2 of the Cape York Welfare Reform evaluation will examine progress and outcomes of the
reforms, based on a range of qualitative and quantitative research, monitoring data, and outcomes
measurement - and will examine success of the reforms against the objectives.
Cape York Welfare Reform evaluation - Stage 1: Implementation
review of the Families Responsibilities Commission (FRC)
Year: 2009 and 2010
Evaluator: KPMG
This review is a post-implementation review of the first 18 months of the FRC. The review focuses on
implementation and examines:
Was the FRC implemented as intended?
Are there aspects of implementation that could be improved?
Community Development Financial Institution (CDFI)
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: TBD
A performance monitoring and evaluation framework is currently being developed for the Community
Development Financial Institution (CDFI) Pilot. This framework will assess the pilot against the following
objectives:
Increase the financial inclusion of individuals from target groups including Indigenous
Australians and other vulnerable Australians
Test and gain further evidence of the unmet demand for financial services and products and the
contribution of CDFIs to meeting this demand
Contribute to the investigation of the infrastructure and legislative framework necessary to
support CDFIs in Australia.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 84
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of the Closing the Gap Clearinghouse
Year: 2010-11
Evaluator: O’Brien Rich Research Group
The evaluation gave an early indication of the progress of the Clearinghouse, and made
recommendations to improve the utility of Clearinghouse products.
Nation Building and Jobs Plan National Partnership
Year: 2010
The Commonwealth, in consultation with the States and Territories, will review the Agreement.
Social and Emotional Wellbeing of Indigenous Youth – Review of
the evidence and its Implications for policy and service provision
Year: 2010
Evaluator: University of New South Wales (UNSW Global Pty Limited)
This review is a detailed study into the factors contributing to poor social and emotional wellbeing
among Indigenous young people.
The study will:
Review relevant literature
Review past and current policy and program approaches
Complete a series of informative case studies
Assess the findings and discuss their implications for policy and program delivery.
Torres Strait Regional Authority Major Infrastructure
Program (MIP) Stages 3 and 4
Year: 2010
Evaluator: GNL Enterprises Pty Ltd
In 1998, the Australian and Queensland governments agreed that the health of the Torres Strait and
Aboriginal people in the Torres Strait region would be improved through the development or upgrading
of basic environmental health infrastructure. The MIP program was jointly and equally funded by the
Australian and Queensland Governments. Since commencement in 1998, MIP has delivered 65 major
infrastructure projects and a further 22 projects are currently in construction, design or planning phases.
During this period, the Australian and Queensland Governments have jointly provided a total of
approximately $208 million.
The award-winning program has a well-deserved reputation for the effective and efficient delivery of
environmental health infrastructure to the communities of the region, within budget and in a timely
manner. The environmental health infrastructure delivered under MIP has had substantial and tangible
impacts on health, quality-of-life and overall community sustainability in the Torres Strait region, and
reflects the continued success of the whole-of-government partnership.
Terms of Reference
Review of Infrastructure Funding Programs in the Torres Strait region with a final report by 1 September
2010
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 85
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Evaluation of the Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Lands
Multi-Sport Regional Participation Agreement
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Armstrong Muller Consulting
The evaluation will:
Determine the degree to which the RPA addresses its stated objectives
Determine the degree to which the Indigenous Justice Program activities and the RPA assisted
with diverting people from adverse contact with the criminal justice system
Explore and provide options for the sustainability of the program
Terms of Reference
Capture ‘the story’ of the RPA from inception to date
To determine the effectiveness of the project, identify and summarise the program processes
and procedures that worked, or did not work for whom and in what context. Develop case
studies capturing qualitative data about the impacts of the project
Identify and describe the challenges and barriers which have impacted on the project paying
regard to the ongoing sustainability of the project
Identify and depict any unintended or unanticipated impacts or outcomes
Establish if there has been effective community engagement.
Describe what elements of the whole-of-government approach that worked well and what
could be improved.
Scoping study of the facility within which the APY Substance
Misuse Residential and Mobile Outreach Service is situated
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Circa
The aim of this project is to develop options for expanding the use of the facility within which the Drug
and Alcohol Services South Australia (DASSA) Anangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara (APY) Lands
Substance Misuse Residential and Mobile Outreach Service is located.
Terms of Reference
Determine the requirements of DASSA to continue to run the APY Substance Misuse residential
and mobile outreach service
Develop options/recommendations for using those parts of the facility that DASSA does not
require which are practical and sustainable, that take account of existing programs, and are
complementary to the operations of the APY Substance Misuse service.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 86
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of Certain FaHCSIA-funded Youth Services
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Urbis
The purpose of this review is to examine what has been successfully implemented, what has worked
and not worked, and what could be improved in relation to certain youth activities funded by the
Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) in the context
of addressing and preventing alcohol and substance misuse:
The Central Australian Integrated Youth Services Project (IYSP)
Social and recreational activities delivered under the NTER Youth Alcohol Diversion measure
(NTER YADM).
Terms of Reference
Stage 1 - literature review looking at:
Stage 2
Stage 3
definitions of petrol sniffing, its prevalence and manifestations, particularly for remote
Aboriginal communities
potential alignment of the Petrol Sniffing Strategy with other Indigenous-specific policy
initiatives, in particular the Council of Australian Government’s (COAG) Closing the Gap on
Indigenous Disadvantage National Partnership Agreements
the links between petrol sniffing and other forms of substance abuse
the immediate and long term effects of petrol sniffing on the individual, family and community
interventions that have been successful in dealing with petrol sniffing and other substance
abuse issues affecting Aboriginal youth
models and approaches to Aboriginal youth work, particularly for communities in remote and
geographically isolated regions.
a review of activities funded under the NTER YADM, to assess the impact of these projects and
the different approaches used to fund and manage the projects.
a comprehensive review of the IYSP funded under the PSS. The aim of this review was to
determine the impact and success of the IYSP against the objectives of the PSS Eight Point Plan,
other source documents and from a stakeholder perspective. The review also aimed to assess
the effectiveness of the governance arrangements put in place to manage these projects.
Research into Legislation Relating to Petrol Sniffing
Year: 2010
Evaluator: Jill Shaw
Website:
http://internetauthoring/sa/indigenous/pubs/evaluation/petrol_sniffing/research_legislation/Pages/defa
ult.aspx
Terms of Reference
This Report was commissioned by the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and
Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA) in response to Recommendation 10 of the 2006 Senate Community Affairs
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 87
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
References Committee’s 2006 report Beyond petrol sniffing: renewing hope for Indigenous communities.
The final report contains sensitive information about sniffing incidence in Indigenous communities and
is not available for publication. The Executive Summary is however published at the website listed
above. The Report examines the practical impacts of the fact that different jurisdictions have different
legislative frameworks and powers in place.
Findings
There are no major adverse impacts from inconsistencies in existing legislation that can be addressed by
the introduction of consistent legislation relating to volatile substance misuse.
The vast majority of stakeholders are satisfied with the legislative tools currently at their disposal.
Stakeholders recognise that legislative frameworks are fundamental tools in the response to volatile
substance misuse.
Stakeholders identify the following issues as critical to the successful and sustained reduction of levels
of volatile substance misuse in Indigenous communities:
strategies to reduce the supply of sniffable substances
access to good quality services such as rehabilitation and diversionary programs (including
youth services)
Stakeholders consider that supply reduction strategies, and access to good quality treatment and
diversionary programs are of primary importance in the successful and sustained reduction of levels of
volatile substance misuse.
Recommendations
That no further action be taken with regard to the introduction of consistent legislation on volatile
substance misuse in all jurisdictions.
That the Australian government continue to identify opportunities to increase community capacity and
effectiveness in their response to volatile substance misuse.
That FaHCSIA note the consistent feedback from stakeholders that the availability of youth services,
and lack of good quality treatment and rehabilitation services encountered in all jurisdictions are more
pressing issues than consistent legislation.
That FaHCSIA consider commissioning further work to explore the gaps in service delivery identified in
this Report.
Fixing Houses for Better Health
Year: 2010
Auditor: The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Fixing Houses for Better Health is a targeted program that aims to make small-scale but key safety and
functionality repairs to houses with a focus on repairs that contribute to what are known as the
‘Healthy Living Practices’. The program has been delivered in remote areas of Australia since 1999.
The objective of the audit is to examine the effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s administration of the program
since 2005.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 88
June 2010

Home Ownership on Indigenous Land
Year: 2010
Auditor: The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Home Ownership on Indigenous Land (HOIL) program aims to provide incentives and affordable
loans to make home ownership a realistic choice for Indigenous people living on community titled land.
The program is primarily administered by Indigenous Business Australia (IBA) with other elements being
administered by FaHCSIA. The HOIL program received funding of $107.4 million over the four years from
2006–07.
The objective of this audit is to assess the administrative effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s and IBA’s
management of the HOIL program.
Government Business Managers
Year: 2010
Evaluator: The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
The objectives of the audit are to assess the administrative effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s management of
the GBM measure, and the extent to which the measure has improved the coordination and delivery of
services in the Northern Territory.
Performance Audit of Indigenous Community Volunteers (ICV)
Year: 2009/2010
Auditor: The former Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) Department of Finance and
Administration
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2009-2010.cfm
The performance audit examined the efficiency and effectiveness of ICV in providing volunteer services
and achieving skills transfer to Indigenous Australians in order to support social and economic
development.
Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP)
Year: 2009/2010
Evaluator: The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
In 2008, the ANAO Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs) (the Office) commenced an
evaluation of CDEP with a focus on its operation in the period 2004 to 2008.
The objective of the evaluation was to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and appropriateness of the
CDEP program to Indigenous participants and communities in achieving the outcomes of real jobs and
viable business enterprises. The evaluation also considered the extent to which CDEP substituted or
displaced business and service provision in communities, the extent to which CDEP cross-subsidised the
provision of government services and comments on the conversion of CDEP positions providing
government services into real jobs.
In July 2009, the government implemented reforms to CDEP, which are described elsewhere in this
report. The performance of the program since these reforms has not been the subject of this
evaluation, however, where an aspect of the reforms is relevant to a finding made in relation to the
operation of the pre-2009 program this has been commented upon in the report. In some cases, the
reforms have dealt with some of the matters Evaluation of the Community Development Employment
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 89
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Projects (CDEP) Program found by the evaluation. In others, the findings have not been affected by the
reforms and remain valid.
Findings
The evaluation found that the outcomes from CDEP are modest. The evaluation found that there are
three main reasons for the outcomes:
participants have a poor capacity for employment
the cultural and community context, including the intergenerational context, makes success
difficult
there are limited opportunities in most of the labour markets in which CDEP operates.
The key issue arising from the evaluation is the need to be completely clear about what outcomes are
sought from the CDEP program. For most of its existence CDEP has worked with two major objectives,
employment outcomes and community development outcomes. Evidence gathered by the evaluation
suggests that the actual priority of these outcomes is mixed. Although it is possible to identify an intent
that CDEP increasingly focuses on employment outcomes and labour market preparation, it is not clear
whether this is the case in practice.
Reforms made in 2009 to CDEP indicate that the Government expects most participants to be aligned to
the Work Readiness stream, over the Community Development stream. Evidence from the case studies
undertaken in this evaluation indicated that placements have been overwhelmingly in the community
development stream. Changing this balance will be a challenge for the future management of the CDEP
program, particularly when it appears that the provider incentives (the outcome fees for each stream)
are the same for a placement in a community project as in a non-CDEP employment position.
The evaluation found that CDEP contributes to the community in which it operates however, where
CDEP is associated with holding communities together, either through ‘community development’ or
‘economic development’ it is likely to be diluted as a labour market program and be less effective. From
a program efficiency and effectiveness perspective, CDEP would be better recognised as a labour
market program and be intimately connected to other labour market programs.
The evaluation concluded that CDEP can be improved and become more appropriate to the goals of real
jobs and viable business enterprises if the following are addressed:
providers focussed on preparing participants for real jobs, wherever these are offered by the
labour market
CDEP is sufficiently intense to overcome entrenched poor behaviour
CDEP addresses intergenerational unemployment in remote communities by assisting
participants to experience workplaces outside of the communities in which they operate.
The Office also concluded that CDEP is not as well suited to address community development issues or
economic development issues as these are not the same as labour market preparation issues and
should be pursued separately.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 90
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Compendium of Petrol Sniffing Strategy-Related Evaluation
Findings (2006-2010)
Year: 2006-2010
Evaluator: AIATSIS
The Compendium provides a summary of the key findings and emerging themes from key evaluation
and research reports commissioned through implementation of the Petrol Sniffing Strategy (PSS) from
2006 to 2010. The Departments of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs
(FaHCSIA), Health and Ageing (DoHA) and the Attorney General (AG) have all generated reports that
either describe and analyse programs that have been funded through the PSS, or cover areas that are
closely associated to volatile substance misuse (VSM). Due for completion in early 2011, the
Compendium articulates findings against each element of the PSS Eight Point Plan, including lessons
learnt and good practice.
Review of the public awareness program
Year: 2009
Evaluator: O’Brien Rich Research Group
The objective is to provide an independent assessment of the appropriateness, efficiency and
effectiveness of the program in meeting its stated aims and to provide recommendations on how the
program might be improved to better cater for contemporary requirements.
Program design, focusing on the rationale and overall design of the program
Program management, focusing on the systems and processes relating to resource allocation,
roles and responsibilities
The “fit” of the program within the department’s strategic framework, business planning and
the Government’s policy framework
Program monitoring and reporting requirements.
Because of the changes that have occurred to the program over time, the review is confined to the
period 2005 onwards.
Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program –
Review of Program Performance
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Northern Territory and Commonwealth Governments
Terms of Reference
The Review analysed the performance of the program, particularly in response to Australian
Government and public concerns that:
The program had been slow to deliver housing (timing)
The governance of the program was overly bureaucratic (governance)
The program was too costly (total cost), including that the costs of houses under the program
(unit cost) and program administration (administrative cost) were too high.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 91
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Reviewers determined that the overall program design was sound. While certain high level aspects
of the program must be addressed these have been identified early enough to ensure the program
meets its objectives within the original timeframe.
The program must be refocused in order to be able to meet its targets of 750 houses, 230 rebuilds and
2500 refurbishments. It was clear that in the development of the initial packages of works an imbalance
emerged between program objectives. Elements such as design and community engagement were
elevated to the detriment of the unit cost required to achieve program targets, thereby skewing
program outcomes.
Performance Audit of the International Repatriation Program
Year: 2009
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (now part of ANAO)
Website: www.anao.gov.au
Terms of Reference
The objective of the performance audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s
management of the International Repatriation Program, with a focus on how effectively it manages the
program to achieve its defined outcomes.
Findings
The audit found that FaHCSIA has managed negotiations for the return of overseas remains in a
positive, constructive and coordinated way, and has developed a very good working relationship with
the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. However, OEA concluded that FaHCSIA has not developed
an overall framework or strategy to build a comprehensive inventory of remains held overseas, and has
made only limited progress in a small number of countries identifying additional remains beyond those
known to exist in 2005.
The audit made 8 recommendations. These primarily concerned the development of program- and
community-level plans setting out how the program will achieve its objectives, as well as principles and
procedures to guide implementation and a performance framework to monitor progress and inform
program reforms.
Performance Audit of the Indigenous Leadership Program
Year: 2009
Auditor: Department of Finance and Deregulation – Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous
Programs)
According to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG), strong leadership is needed to champion
and demonstrate ownership of reforms required to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.
COAG also notes that Indigenous people need to be engaged in the development of reforms that will
impact on them. Improved access to capacity building in governance and leadership is needed in order
for Indigenous people to play a greater role in exercising their rights and responsibilities as citizens.
The Indigenous Leadership Program (ILP) aims to strengthen Indigenous leadership capacity.
Audit objective
The objective of the performance audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s
management of the ILP and to assess the extent to which the program’s objectives are being achieved.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 92
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The audit focused on the management and delivery of the Indigenous Leadership Development
Program (ILDP), and on the National Leadership Program component in particular, as this is the
program understood by most external stakeholders to constitute the Indigenous Leadership Program.
However, the audit did include some analysis of the Indigenous Women’s Program (IWP).
Key Findings
OEA found that ILDP participants do report increased self awareness, confidence, motivation and
networks. These outcomes align with the immediate outcomes articulated in the program’s program
logic and monitoring and evaluation framework. These outcomes are delivered efficiently, with a
modest average cost per participant.
Key elements of the program’s monitoring and evaluation framework have yet to be implemented. As a
result, the extent to which the program has delivered observable progress in participants’ leadership
behaviour and skills and progress toward the program’s stated outcomes through the application of
their learning is not clear.
The ILP is managed by highly dedicated staff who devote additional personal effort to ensuring the
program works well. The audit raised a number of issues about FaHCSIA’s administration of the ILDP.
The department’s structures, systems and processes have not kept pace with the program’s expansion.
OEA found that while IWP grants were small, they are highly valued by their recipients. However, OEA
also found that FaHCSIA’s central office has little or no oversight or involvement in the allocation or
administration of the funds, or in monitoring the outcomes of the funded projects. There is a lack of
communication between central office and State/Territory offices about this program, very little
monitoring of the outcomes of the individual grants and little to no direct contact with recipients of
grants. There is no established link between the IWP and the achievement of IWDP/ILP outcomes.
Evaluation of the Capacity Development Program of the Office of
the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Department of Finance and Deregulation – Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous
Programs)
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/annual-reports/annualreport09-10/oea/evaluationsand-audits.html
The Office of the Registrar of Indigenous Corporation’s Capacity Development Program includes a suite
of accredited and non-accredited governance training programs targeted towards key staff of
Indigenous corporations including directors, managers and Chief Executive Officers. OEA found that
ORIC’s corporate governance training program is likely to be contributing positively to the governance
knowledge of Indigenous individuals, groups and corporations. However, there was some question as
to whether the provision of governance training to individuals was a sufficient approach to developing
the capacity of organisations.
To examine key aspects of the design and delivery of ORIC’s Capacity Development Program in order to
assess its effectiveness and efficiency. The evaluation focused on the governance training component.
OEA made two recommendations for ORIC to improve its program implementation. These were for
ORIC to review its reliance on corporate governance training as a means of achieving capacity
development objectives and consider options to deliver corporate governance training in an integrated
manner focussed at the organisation level, or at least at the board level. Additionally, OEA
recommended ORIC improve the program’s performance framework so that ORIC can better
demonstrate the results of its capacity development activities.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 93
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Review of the Central Australian Petrol Sniffing Strategy Unit
(CAPSSU)
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Urbis
Terms of Reference
Review CAPSSU’s role and function to effectively manage a holistic regional approach to addressing
problems of petrol sniffing in Indigenous communities across the NT. This review informs:
the adequacy of current policies and procedures for ongoing monitoring, evaluation and
reporting on the Unit’s role
the ability of CAPSSU to effectively engage and consult with Indigenous people and
communities
the adequacy of staffing levels and collaboration between CAPSSU and other departments to
support a tri–state, whole of government approach to implementing the Petrol Sniffing
Strategy (PSS)
whether the Alice Springs Indigenous Coordination Centre (ICC) is the most appropriate location
for CAPSSU, to deal with petrol sniffing outbreaks both within and outside of the Central
Australian PSS Zone.
Advise on an appropriate methodology for CAPSSU to collect data on the prevalence and trends over
time in petrol sniffing and substance abuse in Indigenous communities, which would be comparable
across jurisdictions and could be linked with the data collection processes of other agencies.
Identify opportunities and resource implications for expanding CAPSSU’s role to support the
establishment of youth services and workers in each of the communities of the Central Australian PSS
zone (in partnership with State and Territory governments), and to respond to petrol sniffing incidences
outside the zone.
Report on the evaluation of income management in the Northern
Territory
Year: 2009
Evaluator: Australian Institute of Health And Welfare
Terms of Reference
The evaluation was structured around key evaluation questions about how well the program was
implemented and administered, and whether there was evidence that income management was
achieving its objectives.
Findings
In relation to community views of income management, the data showed that there were mixed views
about income management.
On the question of whether income management had improved child and community wellbeing, there
were relevant data from the client interviews and the stakeholder focus groups. The data showed that
there had been improvements in child wellbeing since the introduction of income management. There
was also evidence from these two sources that there had been improvements in community wellbeing
since the introduction of income management, but some of these changes may also be related to other
NTER measures.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 94
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
On the question of whether income management had resulted in changes to people’s expenditure
patterns or improved their money management skills, relevant data came from the client survey, the
stakeholder focus groups and the store operators survey. The data suggested income management had
resulted in some changes in people’s expenditure patterns, with more individual/family income being
spent on priority items, mainly food. There was some evidence that less individual/family income was
being spent on excluded items, but this was not consistent across all the studies. Income management
was reported to have improved money management skills in some families.
On the question of how well income management had been implemented, data came from the 2008
Community consultation report, the client interviews and the stakeholder focus groups. It was found
there were a number of implementation issues associated with the initial income management regime,
but administration of the scheme improved over time. Only a small proportion of clients appeared to be
accessing money management services that were provided to complement income management.
Report on the NTER Redesign Engagement Strategy and
Implementation
Year: 2009
Evaluator: CIRCA
Website:
http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/indigenous/pubs/nter_reports/Pages/report_nter_redesign_strat_implem
ent.aspx
Terms of Reference
CIRCA was engaged to review the engagement and communication strategy for the NTER Redesign
consultations, and to observe a number of the consultations. Monitoring was conducted in order to
answer the following questions:
Findings
Was the engagement strategy appropriate for the task?
Were the communication products appropriate for the task?
Were staff appropriately trained for the engagement task?
Were the consultations undertaken in accordance with the engagement and communications
strategies?
Were interpreters used and used appropriately?
Was the material covered appropriate given the nature of the engagement?
Were the consultations conducted in a way that was open, fair and accountable?
Did the records of meetings reflect the content of the consultations?
Overall the consultants found:
the consultations were undertaken in accordance with the engagement and communication
strategy
meetings were conducted in a way that was open and fair
the material covered was appropriate:
all facilitators demonstrated knowledge of the content delivered in the training session, and
were able to articulate the history of the NTER, the RDA, and the individual measures.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 95
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Facilitators also demonstrated an understanding of how the measures are affecting
communities in order to prompt discussion.
in almost all of the consultations observed, the facilitators ran the meetings in a professional
and respectful manner. Concise and simple language was used in the presentations, and many
also utilised active listening.
use of some of the communication products developed for information delivery was limited.
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Finfish Fishery
Year: 2009
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Australian National Audit Office
A buyout of the non-Indigenous commercial licences in the Torres Strait Finfish Fishery was undertaken
by the Protected Zone Joint Authority (PZJA) in 2007. The Torres Strait Islanders now own 100 percent
of the Australian share of the fishery, which is held in trust by the TSRA. To maintain the economic,
environmental and social value of the fishery, the TSRA, upon advice from the TSRA Finfish Quota
Management Committee, has since July 2008 leased the right to fish a portion of the finfish catch
entitlement to non-Traditional Inhabitant fishers. Following the completion of the first year of leasing,
an audit on the performance of the Torres Strait finfish administrative arrangements was commissioned
to assess the TSRA's management and utilisation of the Torres Strait Finfish Fishery.
Terms of Reference
Findings
Examine the management arrangements for the Finfish Fishery, including the roles and
objectives of various bodies; and
Examine the utilisation of the Finfish Fishery, including its current usage under lease back
arrangements and its contribution to the objectives of the Australian Government and Torres
Strait Islander people.
The audit concluded that the TSRA’s planning of fishery projects and management of leasing
arrangements appears sound, but there is a need to provide a formal mandate for the Communities
Fisheries Group.
Performance Audit of the Northern Land Council - Governance
Component - Report on Recommendations
Year: 2008-09
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2008-2009.cfm
The objective of the governance component audit was to determine:
whether the governance and management structures and processes of the NLC are appropriate,
efficient and effective for a statutory authority established under the Aboriginal Land Rights
(Northern Territory) Act 1976 (ALRA)
whether the alleged current internal conflicts are systemic and indicative of structural issues
within the NLC, or otherwise.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 96
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Performance Audit of the Northern Territory Land Councils
Year: 2008-09
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2008-2009.cfm
The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of the management
and administration of the Land Councils, including mechanisms for measuring the achievement of
outcomes and benchmarking of performance.
Performance Audit of Centrecorp Aboriginal Investment
Corporation Pty Ltd
Year: 2008/2009
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2008-2009.cfm
The objective of the audit was to examine Centrecorp, Yeperenye Nominees and CAAMV Pty Ltd’s
corporate governance arrangements, the sourcing and application of Australian Government funds and
benefits that accrue for Aboriginal people in Central Australia.
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA)
Development Plan
Year: 2008/2009
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2008-
2009.cfm?pageNumber=2
The primary objective of the performance audit was to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the
TSRA in achieving the objectives of the Development Plan and delivering programs including through
the Plan. Due to the need to contain the performance audit to a manageable proportion, the audit
focused on the TSRA’s management of the Development Plan, particularly the performance framework,
program management, and the processes for monitoring of programs. The audit also examined the
management of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP), Housing and
Environmental Health and Economic Development programs, and governance arrangements of the
TSRA.
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Development Plan
Year: 2008
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Australian National Audit Office
The TSRA is required to formulate and implement a plan to guide the progress of the Torres Strait
region towards 2013. The plan is to be known as the Torres Strait Development Plan and is required
under Section 142D of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Act 2005.
Terms of Reference
The primary objective of the performance audit was to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the
TSRA in achieving the objectives of the Development Plan and delivering programs including through
the Plan. Due to the need to contain the performance audit to a manageable proportion, the audit
focused on the TSRA’s management of the Development Plan, particularly the performance framework,
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 97
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
program management, and the processes for monitoring of programs. The audit also examined the
management of the Community Development Employment Projects (CDEP), Housing and
Environmental Health and Economic Development programs, and governance arrangements of the
TSRA.
Findings
The Evaluator has made findings and recommendations under the headings of Planning, Community
Development and Projects Program, Housing and Environmental Health Infrastructure, Economic
Development and Governance. The TSRA agreed with the seven recommendations in the report.
Report of the NTER Review Board
Year: 2008
Evaluators: Mr Peter Yu, Ms Marcia Ella Duncan and Mr Bill Gray AM
Website: http://www.nterreview.gov.au/report.htm
Terms of Reference
The NTER Review Board will:
examine evidence and assess the overall progress of the NTER in improving the safety and
wellbeing of children and laying the basis for a sustainable and better future for residents of
remote communities in the NT, and in particular, in improving the education, health, community
safety and employment outcomes for citizens, and particularly women and children, resident in
remote communities and town camps in the Northern Territory.
consider what is and isn't working and whether the current suite of NTER measures will deliver
the intended results, whether any unintended consequences have emerged and whether other
measures should be developed or ways of working applied to better address circumstances
facing remote communities in the Northern Territory
in relation to each NTER measure, make an assessment of its effects to date, and recommend
any required changes to improve each measure and monitor performance.
In making these assessments and recommendations, the Review Board should give particular regard to
the government's intention that Indigenous interests be engaged to ensure effective policy
development and implementation processes, and that policy and program measures to be adopted or
endorsed by the Government give primacy to the interests of families and children and have regard to
the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.
The Review Board should also have regard to any relevant evaluation and review processes that may
have already been undertaken in relation to the NTER.
Findings
The overarching recommendation from the review Board was that:
The Australian and Northern Territory Governments recognise as a matter of urgent national
significance the continuing need to address the unacceptably high level of disadvantage and
social dislocation being experienced by Aboriginal Australians living in remote communities
throughout the Northern Territory.
In addressing these needs both governments acknowledge the requirement to reset their
relationship with Aboriginal people based on genuine consultation, engagement and
partnership.
Government actions affecting the aboriginal communities respect Australia's human rights
obligations and conform with the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 98
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Analysis of performance of Indigenous students / Program for
International Student Assessment (PISA)
Year: 2008
Evaluator: ACER
Review of the first phase of the Petrol Sniffing Strategy
Year: 2008
Evaluator: Urbis
Website: http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/indigenous/pubs/evaluation/petrolsniffing/Pages/default.aspx
This review is primarily concerned with the period July 2006 to December 2007 and focuses in particular
on the Northern Territory.
Terms of Reference
define the theory behind the Strategy
examine the causal logic of the impact of the Strategy on the Overcoming Indigenous
Disadvantage (OID) headline indicators
describe the policy context of the Strategy and how well the Strategy has been designed
answer questions about how well the Strategy is being implemented in accordance to its
original design
examine the suitability of the success criteria, their measures and the performance reporting
approach
describe how the Strategy has progressed in its initial implementation ie outputs/activities
achieved to date
provide stakeholder and participant feedback on the appropriateness and satisfaction of
programs/services/ activities implemented to date
describe the reach of the Strategy to date (e.g. numbers and locations of sites receiving Opal
fuel, number, age and gender of youth participating in various youth diversionary activities
implemented to date, reach of the communication strategy in Alice Springs etc)
describe the coordination and implementation of the whole of government approach between
the Australian, State and Territory governments
provide options for consideration about how the Strategy can be improved, noting that the
strategy is currently being expanded to other areas.
Aboriginals Benefit Account (ABA)
Year: 2008
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (OEA)
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/oea/
In 2008 the OEA completed a performance audit of the ABA, which examined and reported on the
efficiency, effectiveness, and economy of the account, and its overall management. The OEA report
was publicly released in March 2009.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 99
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The performance audit provided relevant and useful recommendations on ways to improve the
administration of the ABA. Good progress has been made in implementing the recommendations,
which is contributing to improved governance, administration and reporting.
Evaluation of Indigenous Business Australia (IBA)
Year: 2007-08
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website: http://www.anao.gov.au/director/publications/Indigenousprogramsreports/2007-2008.cfm
The objectives of the evaluation were to assess:
the extent to which the objectives of these programs are consistent with the broad Australian
Government policy objectives relating to the enhancement of economic self-sufficiency, selfmanagement
and the economic and commercial interests of Indigenous Australians
the effectiveness of the IBA programs in enhancing Indigenous Australians’ economic selfsufficiency,
self-management and economic and commercial interests; and broadly assess the
efficiency with which IBA delivers these programs.
Implementation Review of Shared Responsibility Agreements
(SRAs)
Year: 2007
Evaluator: Morgan Disney & Associates
Website:
http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/indigenous/pubs/evaluation/implementation_review/Documents/default.
htm
In April 2007 Morgan Disney & Associates were contracted through an open tender process to
undertake an overarching SRA Implementation Review.
Terms of reference
The review:
assessed the approach used in practice, against the intentions identified in the new
arrangements in Indigenous affairs;
analysed the lessons from the review of individual agreements;
and provided options to improve and add value to the SRA approach.
The SRA Implementation Review ‘Don’t Let’s Lose Another Good Idea’ was completed in August 2007
and the report has since been made available to the public.
Findings
The Implementation Review found:
a majority of people in communities have embraced SRAs and see them as a significant new way
of working with Government to address issues in their communities
ICCs are regarded as critical in fostering meaningful relationships and promoting engagement
between government and communities.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 100
June 2010

Review of Communities in Crisis
Year: 2007
Evaluator: SGS Economics and Planning
Website: http://www.oipc.gov.au/publications
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The Communities in Crisis initiative aims to help stabilise communities suffering from intolerable levels
of alcohol, substance and child abuse, violence and high rates of suicide and self-harm. Due to the
volatile and unstable environment, initial work focuses on stabilising the community. The work may also
require the long-term presence of a community development coordinator/place manager, access to
specialised services and may act as a catalyst for a more comprehensive response.
The approach requires the Commonwealth and State Governments to work together to address a
number of objectives, while recognising the responsibilities of each level of government. The objectives,
dependant on the need within individual communities, are:
Stabilising communities (e.g. family violence, substance abuse, corruption)
Re-establishing basic services
Developing local plans of action
Building governance, capacity and leadership
Helping communities engage with government
Improving service delivery
Terms of Reference
The consultant will conduct a formative evaluation of a selection of communities involved in the
Communities in Crisis initiative. The evaluation will occur at Beagle Bay, Balgo, Kalumburu and Yalata.
The evaluation will look at what is working, what isn’t working and what could be done better. The
evaluation will also provide the Australian Government with options it might consider for continued
positive change for the future, best practice inventions and ongoing performance measurement.
Implementation Review of Indigenous Coordination Centres
Year: 2007
Evaluator: KPMG
Website: http://www.oipc.gov.au/publications
In March 2007, independent consultants KPMG were contracted through a single-stage open tender
process to undertake a review of the ICC model. The review was strategic in nature and comprised of
two stages. The first stage was a diagnostic evaluation designed to measure how well ICCs are
performing against the Secretaries Group ICC model; while the second stage involved the development
of a Continuous Development Plan, with a menu of options to enhance ICC performance.
Consultations were carried out on a sample of eight ICCs using a combination of semi-structured
interviews and focus group discussions with ICC stakeholders. In developing and progressing the
review, OIPC Group consulted with a range of stakeholders.
The first stage of the ICC review focused on collecting qualitative data to measure ICC performance
against the Secretaries Group ICC model. The second stage of the review focused on enhancing ICC
performance.
A final evaluation report was delivered to the OIPC group in FaCSIA on 15 June 2007, completing the first
stage of the review. The findings identified strengths and opportunities for improvement within ICCs,
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 101
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
and were used to inform the Continuous Development Plan (CDP) which contains a menu of options to
improve the functioning of ICCs.
The final CDP was delivered to OIPC on 13 July 2007, completing the second stage of the ICC review
process. The CDP detailed specific themes for development to strengthen the implementation of the
ICC model and identified the roles and responsibilities of each government stakeholder in improving the
implementation of the ICC model. Four inter-related themes were identified for the plan, which cut
across all five components of the ICC model. A series of strategies were identified for each theme to
help guide the recommended actions, which in turn fed into identified key indicators, which will be used
to assess the progress and success of the CDP.
Findings
internal government stakeholders and external stakeholders support the improvement and
strengthening of the ICC model
good practice exists in working with Indigenous communities and organisations of varying
needs and this practice should be built upon
improvement is required in the area of Whole-of- Government collaboration to increase access
to mainstream programs and funding opportunities
further investment in staffing, especially of Solution Brokers, by line agencies in all ICCs is
required
improvement is required to develop flexible responses to reduce red-tape and duplication of
processes at the ICC level
improving the implementation of the ICC model requires a commitment by all Australian
Government agencies involved in the Whole-of -Government arrangements to operating with
agreed common standards for the successful operation of ICCs.
A Red Tape Evaluation in Selected Indigenous Communities
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Morgan Disney & Associates Pty Ltd
Website: http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/indigenous/pubs/evaluation/redtape/Pages/default.aspx
This evaluation on the administrative burden of government funding programs on Indigenous
organisations was undertaken between mid-2005 and January 2006. The evaluation involved a sample
of half of the Indigenous Coordination Centres (ICCs), and 22 Indigenous organisations in receipt of
government funding and nominated by the 14 ICCs in the sample. The evaluation set out to establish the
extent and nature of the administrative burden commonly known as ‘red tape’.
Findings
Australian Government funding programs operate under an accountability framework that places
obligations on both the funding agency and the organisation receiving funding. The evaluation did not
identify anything within this framework which, in and of itself, creates red tape or an unreasonable
burden on funded organisations. In the assessment of the evaluators, actual red tape is less than
perceived red tape, and many of the issues raised as examples of red tape are in fact about
relationships, program management practices, and the capacity of government agencies, ICCs and
funded organisations. Thus the evaluation concluded that red tape or unreasonable burden is created
primarily at the operational level in terms of how the accountability framework is translated into
departmental and local practices.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 102
June 2010

Areas for investigation included:
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
better match the treatment of small grants to the limited risk they represent
improve the quality and usefulness of performance indicators used
support the implementation of improved policy and practical guidance
concurrently, develop a training program for managers and governance bodies of Indigenous
organisations
reduce the effort involved in annual appropriations and annual applications for funds
pursue the development of single agreements
give ICCs responsibility and authority in the management of relationships with funded
Indigenous organisations
review the budgets and management of resources for making field visits.
Stronger Families and Communities Strategy 2004-08
Year: On-going from 2006
Evaluator: Social Policy Research Centre, UNSW & the Australian Institute of Family Studies
Website: http://www.aifs.gov.au/cafca/
Terms of Reference
Three of the four strategy initiatives (Communities for Children; Invest to Grow – including established
and developing programs; and Local Answers) are being evaluated on an on-going basis.
Out of scope for the evaluation is the Tools and Resources component of Invest to Grow and the Choice
and Flexibility in Child Care initiative which will have their own evaluations.
Performance Audit of the Torres Strait Regional Authority
Economic Development Program
Year: 2006
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/published_oea__ip__evaluation_.html
The Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA) was originally established as a Statutory Authority under
Part 3A Division 1 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission Act 1989. It came into effect
on 1 July 1994. TSRA comprises a Board of 20 elected Members and is supported by an administrative
arm of about 26 staff. Funding of $56.8 million was allocated to administer TSRA in 2006-07.
TSRA is responsible for many national and regional programs for people in the Torres Strait, which were
previously administered by ATSIC. These include Economic Development, Native Title, Housing and
Environment Health Infrastructure, and Social, Cultural and Development. Section 76 of the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Commission Act 1989 required the then Office of Evaluation and Audit to
regularly evaluate and audit the operations of TSRA.
Terms of Reference
The objective of this audit was to form an opinion as to whether the TSRA’s Economic Development
Program (EDP) was being managed and administered in an effective and efficient manner, and the
extent to which the ‘High Priority’ recommendations contained in the Office’s August 2005 audit report
had been progressed and/or implemented.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 103
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The audit made a number of recommendations regarding the operation and monitoring of TSRA’s loan
management, loans procedures, loans assessment, loans arrears and loans management systems. The
TSRA agreed with all 19 of the recommendations in the report. The auditor found that, generally, the
‘High Priority’ recommendations contained OEA (IP)’s August 2005 audit report have been adequately
progressed or implemented.
Indigenous Community Housing Organisations
Year: 2006
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/published_oea__ip__evaluation_.html
Community housing services are provided through some 600 Indigenous Community Housing
Organisations (ICHOs) that are primarily funded through the Community Housing and Infrastructure
Program (CHIP). The estimated expenditure for CHIP is $292 million in 2006-07.
ICHOs may have several roles including asset and tenancy management, community management,
community welfare and municipal services.
The objective of the audit is to assess the community housing activities undertaken by ICHOs funded
through the Community Housing and Infrastructure output of CHIP. This will involve an examination of
how efficiently and effectively a sample of ICHOs are managed and have used funding for:
capital construction, purchase and upgrade of community owned or managed rental housing
general administration costs
repairs and maintenance of existing housing stock where rental income and service charges are
not sufficient to meet the costs involved.
Aspects of the reporting arrangements for program outputs and outcomes will also be examined.
Terms of Reference
The scope of the audit was confined to activities funded under the Housing and Housing Related
Infrastructure element of the CHIP program (which comprised $59.012M of the 2004-05 appropriation
of $249.869M). In addition, the audit was limited to ICHOs which receive funding directly from the
Commonwealth (i.e. those in Queensland, Victoria and Tasmania). Therefore, details of any poorly
performing ICHOs operating in states funded under pooled arrangements are not addressed by the
audit.
Review of Individual Shared Responsibility Agreements
Year: 2006
Evaluator: Ten independent consultants
The reviews of the individual Shared Responsibility Agreements (SRAs) typically commence some 12
months after the SRAs are signed or at an appropriate review point. The reviews are conducted by a
panel of 10 consultants over a 3 year period. The first group of reviews was completed in September
2006, and provided to the signatories shortly after. The second round of reviews was completed in
April 2007, and the reviews have been sent to the signatories. The third round is due to start in the
latter half of the 2008 financial year.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 104
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Because of the learning nature of this process and the potential impact on individuals in small
communities, FaHCSIA does not plan to make the reviews of individual SRAs public. However a
summary of the lessons will be made available from time to time and the Implementation Review of
SRAs has been made publicly available.
Evaluations of the Eight COAG Trial Sites and Synopsis Review
Year: 2005-06
Evaluator: Various (Eight COAG Trial Sites); Morgan Disney (Synopsis Review)
Website:
http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/indigenous/pubs/evaluation/coag_trial_site_reports/overiew/Pages/defaul
t.aspx
Evaluations of all eight Council of Australian Governments (COAG) trial sites have been completed, and
were publicly released on 22 February 2007, along with a Synopsis Review that pulled together the
findings from the individual reports. All reports are available on the FaHCSIA website. The purpose of
the trials was to find new ways for governments and Indigenous communities to work together to
achieve better outcomes. The evaluations focused on the lessons learnt from the trials, and in particular
how governments can improve their engagement with each other and with Indigenous people and
communities. The reports include the history of the trial, the coordination processes used in the trial,
interim outcomes and options for further consideration. Findings show that trial partners saw better
relationships being built between governments and communities, and among governments.
Audit of the TSRA Administrative and Performance Functions
Year: 2005
Auditor: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs), Department of Finance and
Administration
The audit of the Administrative and Program functions of the Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA)
was conducted to assess the extent to which the operations and administration of TSRA accord with
approved policies and procedures.
Terms of Reference
The audit:
Findings
identified the principal systems, procedures and controls operating within TSRA;
assessed and reported on the adequacy and effectiveness of identified internal controls in
contributing to program outcomes;
had regard to, and reported on (as appropriate), the efficiency, effectiveness and economy of
operations;
reported on aspects of good practice and innovation where identified; and
issued recommendations as appropriate.
The audit made a number of recommendations regarding business planning and risk management,
standard operating procedures, program functions, loans and administrative functions. The TSRA
agreed with all 26 of the recommendations in the report.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 105
June 2010

Waarvah Project Evaluation
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Colmar Brunton Social Research
Terms of Reference
The specific objectives of the evaluation were to:
Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
explore which aspects of the project are ‘working’ or ‘not working’ in the context of the above
project objectives and the reasons for this;
identify possible areas for improvement of the project from the perspective of Indigenous
youths and stakeholders;
evaluate the mode of project delivery (i.e. a non-Indigenous agency working with Indigenous
providers) and identify the ‘success factors’ in such a model; and
deliver the findings in a way that is relevant and meaningful for all stakeholders in the project
and able to capture the ‘quality’ of communications, interventions and outcomes arising from
the project.
Overall this qualitative evaluation has identified that Waarvah is an effective project that has ‘made a
difference’ to the lives of Indigenous youths and their families. In particular, Waarvah has been
successful in helping to reduce the risk of homelessness for Indigenous youths in the Bundaberg area.
Although this evaluation does not measure this reduction in a statistical sense, evaluation participants
involved in this evaluation have provided their views and experiences to support their perception that
Waarvah helps in a meaningful and effective way.
This evaluation has also identified that the extent of homelessness among Indigenous youth in the
Bundaberg area is a problem that the current resources and capacity of Waarvah are unable to address.
Considerable funding would therefore be required to enable Waarvah to cope with the unmet demand
for appropriate services by Indigenous youths and their families. Participants have provided a number
of other suggestions to assist Waarvah to improve its delivery of services and assistance to Indigenous
youths at risk of homelessness. These suggestions are set out in the body of the report.
National Aboriginal Health Strategy delivery of Housing and
Infrastructure to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Communities Follow-up Audit
Year: 2004
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) and P. Farrelly & Associates Pty Ltd
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/F1717B8031E74528CA256E82007AFF15/$file/Audit%20
Report%2044.pdf
Terms of Reference
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services (ATSIS) provided the ANAO with a written statement
commenting on progress against the seven recommendations of the previous audit report. The ANAO
then assessed ATSIS’ progress in implementing the recommendations by analysing its statement,
conducting interviews with relevant ATSIS staff in late 2003 and checking relevant documentation.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 106
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The ANAO concluded that ATSIS has fully implemented four of the seven recommendations of the
previous audit. Specifically, recommendations relating to benchmarking performance, program
monitoring, and stakeholder relationships have been implemented. Other recommendations have
either been partially implemented or are no longer relevant.
Evaluation of Aboriginal Hostels Limited
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/docs/AHL_Evaluation_report_for_web2.pdf
Terms of Reference
The evaluation attempts to measure the likely impact of Aboriginal Hostels Limited (AHL) on its
recipients indirectly through indicators including:
Findings
each resident’s purpose for staying at the hostels
the geographical spread of residents
extent of repeat patronage
length of stay at hostels
the extent to which clients can afford to stay elsewhere
the extent to which non-Indigenous people are using the service.
The report found that the average bed occupancy rate in all AHL hostels is 72%, which compares very
well with the room occupancy rate of 55% in the tourism accommodation industry, and even more
favourably with the more comparable bed occupancy rate in that industry. The report notes that AHL is
only a gap provider for homeless, aged and substance use rehabilitation accommodation, and supply of
AHL hostels for such accommodation is unavoidably influenced by state government funding decisions
in these areas. There is an opportunity for AHL and the Council of Australian Governments to better
coordinate the matching of demand and supply for Indigenous housing and accommodation.
The evaluation found that AHL hostels are meeting a real need for accommodation for many who have
to travel a long distance to access important services that are otherwise not available where they
usually reside. Furthermore, the reasons given by residents for staying at the hostel are satisfactorily
consistent with the purpose for which the hostel was established. While the authors conclude that AHL
appears to need the most improvement in targeting to areas of greatest need, they also find that
patrons of AHL hostels are by and large representative of the most disadvantaged section of the
Indigenous population. Hostels appear to be underused by Torres Strait Islanders.
Indigenous Family Violence: Phase 1 Meta-Evaluation Report
Year: 2004
Evaluator: Strategic Partners
Website: http://www.padv.dpmc.gov.au/projects/padv_phase_one_ifv.pdf
The Australian Government has conducted a meta-evaluation of the first phase of its $50 million
Partnerships Against Domestic Violence Initiative (PADVI). The report documents the key findings from
the range of PADVI and associated Indigenous family violence projects funded by the Australian
Government, categorised into six broad groups: prevention; community education and development;
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 107
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
collaboration; counselling and therapeutic interventions; working with men; and community capacity
building.
PADVI has provided a unique and groundbreaking opportunity for governments and community
organisations to work together to examine ways of addressing the impact of domestic and family
violence on women, children and the broader community.
The national collaborative approach has met key objectives and has demonstrated the capacity of the
Australian Government, State and Territories to work together with resources, commitment and
goodwill to address a major social issue.
‘I’m looking at the future’ Evaluation Report of Reconnect
Year: 2003
Evaluator: RPR Consulting
Website:
www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/housing/pubs/homelessyouth/Evaulation_Final_report_2003s/default.aspx
Terms of Reference
The Reconnect evaluation was designed to provide insight into:
Findings
the outcomes for young people and families using the program and the extent to which
outcomes are sustained over time
the extent to which Reconnect has contributed to an improvement in community capacity for
early intervention in youth homelessness
the effectiveness of strategies used by Reconnect services in working with young people,
families and communities
the effectiveness of the program’s management.
The principal finding of the evaluation was that Reconnect intervention resulted in significant positive
outcomes for young people and families. Specifically, Reconnect has been notably successful in
improving stability in young people’s living situations. Reconnect intervention has a major effect in
achieving family reconciliation by increasing the capacity of families to manage conflict and to improve
communication.
Evaluation of the Link Up Program
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit (Indigenous Programs)
Website: http://anao.gov.au/Publications/Indigenous-Program-Reports/2003-2004/Evaluation-of-the-
Link-Up-Program-Report
Terms of Reference
identify the type and level of services provided to clients;
examine the effectiveness of services;
assess the demand for services and the capacity to meet the demand; and
assess the effectiveness of the Link Up liaison with and use of counselling and archival services.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 108
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
The six link ups assessed were found in the main to be providing their core activities, dominated by
family tracing and reunion activities (60%). Four main measures were used as an illustrative indicator of
the effectiveness of the service including the number of reunions as a percentage of clients, and the
progression of cases to closure, drop off rates and cost per reunion. The achievement of reunions
varied between SA (28%) and QLD (3%). The poorer performing states had a higher drop off rate for
reasons other than lack of a reunion. Costs per link up varied greatly ($7,000 to $53,000 per reunion)
due to the additional funding contributed by some state governments. Client dissatisfaction with link
ups is primarily reported as being due to unrealistic expectations.
Demand for link up services is difficult to measure and strongly relates to the level of promotion of the
service in the regions. The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Survey suggests that there is a
good deal of latent demand (10 – 12% of Indigenous people aged over 25). Capacity to meet demand
may be derived by comparing latent need with actual funding. For example, NSW had 30% of the latent
need but only 14% of funding. Funding should be increased in NSW and WA and decreased in QLD.
Actual numbers of clients who received counselling services was not available. Other findings included
that 45% of link up staff were dissatisfied with the counselling service and 40% of link up cases involved
the use of archival resources at AIATSIS. The accessibility of other archival resources has improved with
greater state contributions.
Family and Community Network Initiative
Year: 2003
Terms of Reference
Since February 2003, the Family and Community Network Initiative has been primarily focused on
supporting Indigenous communities participating in the Council Of Australian Governments’ Indigenous
Community Coordination Pilots (ICCP) around Australia. A program evaluation finalised in 2005-06
examined
appropriateness of the program in addressing identified need within the community;
effectiveness of the program in meeting its objectives and contributing to government
outcomes; and
efficiency of the program in meeting its objectives.
The department also plans to conduct a study on:
expanding the supply of Health Indigenous Housing.
ATSIC/ATSIS (to July 2004) - Putting the pieces together:
Regional plans, data and outcomes
Year: 2003
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/published_oea__ip__evaluation_.html
This evaluation was conducted as a result of the Program Manager’s demand for regional level data.
Regional Planning was one of the key functions of the Regional Councils established under the ATSIC
Act. The absence of reliable and comprehensive data for regional planning has been a major issue,
although at the national level this issue has been advanced under the Council of Australian
Governments (COAG) initiatives.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 109
June 2010

Terms of Reference
Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Determining what information Regional Councils need to plan effectively
Assessing the information available to Regional Councils to assist in planning
Identifying information gaps
Developing a conceptual framework to assist Regional Councils in the process of preparing
regional plans.
Availability and accessibility of data are prerequisites for the development of Regional Plans. The lack of
information base limits Regional Councils’ ability to effectively negotiate with mainstream agencies for
service delivery programs for communities.
The range of information required for developing regional planning includes population, growth,
composition, living conditions, spatial distribution, migration patterns, housing and infrastructure and
the living environment.
Regional Council plan was considered to be the important document for policy, advocacy policy and
development plans representative of the Regions.
As part of the evaluation a workshop was held including Regional Council Chairs, Regional Managers
and other policy experts. Based on their views a planning framework was developed that could be used
by Regional Councils as guide.
Recommendations included:
setting up of a statistical coordination unit to establish, develop and monitor data bases for
ATSIC Regions
revision of ATSIC Act to allow Regional Councils to enter into agreements and Memoranda of
Understanding with mainstream agencies to strengthen the position of Regional Councils in
planning and advocacy, capacity development program covering planning, advocacy and
negotiations is to be provided to members of Regional Councils.
Audit Report No. 28 2002-03: Northern Territory Land Councils
and the Aboriginals Benefit Account
Year: 2003
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office (ANAO)
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/6F305A0E51814A79CA256CC2000CAB4E/$file/Audit%2
0Report%2028.pdf
Terms of Reference
The audit assessed the operations of the four Northern Territory Land Councils which provide a range of
services to Aboriginal people under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. The audit
also assessed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission’s (ATSIC) administration of the
Aboriginals Benefit Account, which provides funding to the Land Councils under the same Act. The
objectives of the audit were to assess: whether the governance arrangements used by ATSIC and the
Land Councils are appropriate; whether ATSIC meets its legislative requirements concerning the
Aboriginals Benefit Account in an effective and efficient way; and whether the Land Councils are
effective and efficient in managing their recourses to meet the objectives of the Aboriginal Land Rights
(Northern Territory) Act 1976.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 110
June 2010

Findings
Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Recommendations were made relating to funding and payments, planning and risk management,
communication with stakeholders and operations. ANAO made seven recommendations, of which
ATSIC and the Land Councils agreed.
Audit Report No. 48 2002-03: Indigenous Land Corporations –
Operations and Performance Follow-up Audit
Year: 2003
Auditor: Australian National Audit Office
Website:
http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/E9773CF94646DF0DCA256D44006EA6F3/$file/Audit%
20Report%2048.pdf
Audit Report No.13 2003–04: Performance Audit of ATSIS Law
and Justice Program
Year: 2003
Outcome data measurement: Unfinished business
Year: 2002
Evaluator: Office of Evaluation and Audit, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission
Website: http://www.finance.gov.au/published_oea__ip__evaluation_.html
The absence of reliable and comprehensive data on service delivery programs of the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Commission or those funded by it has been a major impediment for planning and
monitoring of programs. Recognising this limitation COAG asked the Productivity Commission to report
on performance information on Indigenous programs it its annual reports to the Parliament (Steering
Committee for the Review of Commonwealth/State Service Provision). The major objective of the
evaluation was to critically assess the existing data sources for key Indigenous programs and to indicate
to what extent the data could be used for planning and monitoring Indigenous programs.
Terms of Reference
Findings
Identify the scope and nature of data on outcomes and program performance to improve
outcomes for Indigenous people
Report on the availability of the data and its potential use in evaluation, and program and policy
formulation and delivery; and
Present to the Key Managers Conference in early 2002 information on progress, including data
availability and its potential applications.
The evaluation focussed on four subject matter areas: law and justice; health; education and training;
and housing and infrastructure. Also, it assessed the quality of population census counts and existing
projections.
Over 75 key data sets were reviewed. Some 22 data sets, despite their doubtful coverage (underidentification
of Indigenous people), were considered to be reasonably good (reliable) to be used for
measuring program outcomes.
Nine data sets did not identify Indigenous clients/people separately.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 111
June 2010

Directory of Indigenous and related mainstream evaluation 2002-2010
Forty-two data sets, although contained valuable information for program monitoring, had one or more
of the following limitations: poor coverage of Indigenous peoples, small sample sizes (or small number
of Indigenous clients); poor data quality or incomplete information recorded.
The evaluation strongly recommended the establishment of a statistical unit within the Commission and
suggested that there should be a better coordination with other agencies such as ABS, AIHW, AIC and
Productivity Commission to improve the coverage and the quality of the Indigenous data.
Office of Indigenous Policy Coordination 112
June 2010